Flanagan v. Mitchell

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Flanagan v. Mitchell

211 A.D.2d 751, 621 N.Y.S.2d 911, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 677

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

DecidedJanuary 30, 1995

StatusPublished

This text of 211 A.D.2d 751 (Flanagan v. Mitchell) 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

Flanagan v. Mitchell, 211 A.D.2d 751, 621 N.Y.S.2d 911, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 677 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Nastasi, J.), entered May 20, 1993, which denied their motion pursuant to CPLR 4404 (a) for judgment as a matter of law, or in the alternative, to set aside the verdict and grant a new trial.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with one bill of costs to the respondents appearing separately and filing separate briefs.

The plaintiffs argue that the trial court erred when it denied their motion for judgment as a matter of law or, in the alternative, to set aside the verdict and grant a new trial, after a jury found the defendants not at fault in the happening of an automobile accident. The evidence raised a question of fact for the jury as to whether the defendants were negligent and its verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see, Nicastro v Park, 113 AD2d 129, 132). Thus, the court did not err in denying the motion. Ritter, J. P., Copertino, Joy and Hart, 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 plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Nastasi, J.), entered May 20, 1993, which denied their motion pursuant to CPLR 4404 (a) for judgment as a matter of law, or in the alternative, to set aside the verdict and grant a new trial.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with one bill of costs to the respondents appearing separately and filing separate briefs.

The plaintiffs argue that the trial court erred when it denied their motion for judgment as a matter of law or, in the alternative, to set aside the verdict and grant a new trial, after a jury found the defendants not at fault in the happening of an automobile accident. The evidence raised a question of fact for the jury as to whether the defendants were negligent and its verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see, Nicastro v Park, 113 AD2d 129, 132). Thus, the court did not err in denying the motion. Ritter, J. P., Copertino, Joy and Hart, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

211 A.D.2d 751, 621 N.Y.S.2d 911, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 677, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/flanagan-v-mitchell-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack