Boudreau v. Damas Food Mart Corp.

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Boudreau v. Damas Food Mart Corp.

52 Misc. 2d 930, 277 N.Y.S.2d 246, 1966 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1318

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York·Decided November 17, 1966·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Order unanimously reversed, with $30 costs, and verdict reinstated. While a court may set aside a jury’s verdict for insufficiency, its discretion nevertheless is limited. In this negligence action it cannot be said that the verdict was so inadequate as to reflect bias or prejudice on the part of the jury, warranting the trial court in setting the verdict aside as shocking to the conscience of the court. On the evidence, it appears that the amount awarded represents a fair assessment of damages.

Concur — Hofstadter, J. P., Tilzer and Gold, JJ,

Order reversed, etc,

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Order unanimously reversed, with $30 costs, and verdict reinstated. While a court may set aside a jury’s verdict for insufficiency, its discretion nevertheless is limited. In this negligence action it cannot be said that the verdict was so inadequate as to reflect bias or prejudice on the part of the jury, warranting the trial court in setting the verdict aside as shocking to the conscience of the court. On the evidence, it appears that the amount awarded represents a fair assessment of damages.

Concur — Hofstadter, J. P., Tilzer and Gold, JJ,

Order reversed, etc,

Boudreau v. Damas Food Mart Corp., 52 Misc. 2d 930, 277 N.Y.S.2d 246, 1966 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1318 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1966).

Pincite

52 Misc. 2d 930 (Boudreau v. Damas Food Mart Corp.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related