Eisleben v. Torchia-Reile

178 A.D.2d 940, 580 N.Y.S.2d 888, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 17763
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided December 26, 1991·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

— Order unanimously modified on the law and as modified affirmed with costs to plaintiff and new trial granted on the issue of damages, in accordance with the following Memorandum: Supreme Court properly granted plaintiffs motion to set aside the verdict for zero damages as against the weight of the evidence (see, CPLR 4404 [a]). Upon our review of the record, however, we conclude that the court’s conditional assessment of damages in the amount of $750 is not reasonably grounded. Accordingly, we modify the order ap[941] pealed from to provide that a new trial is granted on the issue of damages. (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Oneida County, Tenney, J. — Set Aside Verdict.) Present — Callahan, J. P., Boomer, Green, Lawton and Davis, JJ.

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

Eisleben v. Torchia-Reile, 178 A.D.2d 940, 580 N.Y.S.2d 888, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 17763 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1991).

178 A.D.2d 940 (Eisleben v. Torchia-Reile) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Brown v. Horn
179 A.D.2d 1073 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1992)