Chandler v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Chandler v. City of New York

271 A.D.2d 567, 708 N.Y.S.2d 298, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4299

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedApril 17, 2000

StatusPublished

This text of 271 A.D.2d 567 (Chandler v. City of New York) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Chandler v. City of New York, 271 A.D.2d 567, 708 N.Y.S.2d 298, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4299 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Schneier, J.), dated March 1, 1999, which granted the plaintiffs motion pursuant to CPLR 4404 to set aside a jury verdict in their favor and ordered a new trial.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, and the motion is denied.

A jury verdict in favor of a defendant should not be set aside unless the jury could not have reached the verdict on any fair interpretation of the evidence (see, Nicastro v Park, 113 AD2d 129, 134). Based on a fair interpretation of the facts and circumstances in this case, the jury could have reached its verdict in the defendants’ favor and therefore, the court erred in setting it aside (see, Nicastro v Park, supra). Joy, J. P., Thompson, Krausman and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

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

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Schneier, J.), dated March 1, 1999, which granted the plaintiffs motion pursuant to CPLR 4404 to set aside a jury verdict in their favor and ordered a new trial.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, and the motion is denied.

A jury verdict in favor of a defendant should not be set aside unless the jury could not have reached the verdict on any fair interpretation of the evidence (see, Nicastro v Park, 113 AD2d 129, 134). Based on a fair interpretation of the facts and circumstances in this case, the jury could have reached its verdict in the defendants’ favor and therefore, the court erred in setting it aside (see, Nicastro v Park, supra). Joy, J. P., Thompson, Krausman and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

271 A.D.2d 567, 708 N.Y.S.2d 298, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4299, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chandler-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack