Disla v. DHL Airways, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Disla v. DHL Airways, Inc.

219 A.D.2d 612, 631 N.Y.S.2d 533, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9304

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided September 18, 1995·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Ruskin, J.), entered November 18, 1993, which, upon a jury verdict finding that the respondents’ negligence was not a proximate cause of the accident, dismissed the complaint insofar as it is asserted against the respondents.

[613] Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiff’s claim regarding the inconsistency of the verdict is unpreserved for appellate review (see, Gross v Fontano, 206 AD2d 505). In any event, the verdict was not inconsistent (see, Rubin v Pecoraro, 141 AD2d 525).

Further, the jury’s findings were not against the weight of the evidence, as they were supported by a fair interpretation of the evidence (see, Briccio v Disbrow, 212 AD2d 565; Moskowitz v Israel, 209 AD2d 676). Sullivan, J. P., Miller, Thompson and Ritter, 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 plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Ruskin, J.), entered November 18, 1993, which, upon a jury verdict finding that the respondents’ negligence was not a proximate cause of the accident, dismissed the complaint insofar as it is asserted against the respondents.

[613] Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiff’s claim regarding the inconsistency of the verdict is unpreserved for appellate review (see, Gross v Fontano, 206 AD2d 505). In any event, the verdict was not inconsistent (see, Rubin v Pecoraro, 141 AD2d 525).

Further, the jury’s findings were not against the weight of the evidence, as they were supported by a fair interpretation of the evidence (see, Briccio v Disbrow, 212 AD2d 565; Moskowitz v Israel, 209 AD2d 676). Sullivan, J. P., Miller, Thompson and Ritter, JJ., concur.

Disla v. DHL Airways, Inc., 219 A.D.2d 612, 631 N.Y.S.2d 533, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9304 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

219 A.D.2d 612 (Disla v. DHL Airways, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related