In this personal injury action, the Appellate Division, Second Department, in accordance with M&H’s arguments, reversed the judgment entered against Plaintiff following a jury trial and remitted the matter back for a new trial, finding that Defendant was not entitled to the Homeowner’s Exemption as a matter of law and, furthermore, that the jury’s verdict was inconsistent because it was “logically impossible” for Defendant’s negligence to not be a proximate cause of Plaintiff’s injuries.