Gibbons v. Ostrow

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Gibbons v. Ostrow

270 A.D.2d 454, 705 N.Y.S.2d 274, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3176

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

DecidedMarch 27, 2000

StatusPublished

This text of 270 A.D.2d 454 (Gibbons v. Ostrow) 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

Gibbons v. Ostrow, 270 A.D.2d 454, 705 N.Y.S.2d 274, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3176 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Martin, J.), entered December 10, 1998, which, upon a jury verdict finding that the defendant Alexander S. Ostrow was not negligent in the happening of the accident, is in favor of the defendants dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

A jury verdict may be set aside as against the weight of the evidence only where the jury could not have reached its verdict on any fair interpretation of the evidence (see, Cohen v Hallmark Cards, 45 NY2d 493; Nicastro v Park, 113 AD2d [455]*455129). Contrary to the plaintiffs contention, the verdict that the defendant Alexander S. Ostrow was not negligent in the operation of his motor vehicle was not against the weight of the evidence. There is also no merit to the plaintiffs contention that improper evidence was presented to the jury by the defendant’s counsel during his questioning of a witness (see generally, Figueroa v Kozminsky, 59 AD2d 521).

The plaintiffs claim with respect to the instructions to the jury is unpreserved for appellate review (see, Harris v Armstrong, 64 NY2d 700; Brodeur v Cooper, 182 AD2d 666). Mangano, P. J., Bracken, Luciano and Smith, 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, Nassau County (Martin, J.), entered December 10, 1998, which, upon a jury verdict finding that the defendant Alexander S. Ostrow was not negligent in the happening of the accident, is in favor of the defendants dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

A jury verdict may be set aside as against the weight of the evidence only where the jury could not have reached its verdict on any fair interpretation of the evidence (see, Cohen v Hallmark Cards, 45 NY2d 493; Nicastro v Park, 113 AD2d [455]*455129). Contrary to the plaintiffs contention, the verdict that the defendant Alexander S. Ostrow was not negligent in the operation of his motor vehicle was not against the weight of the evidence. There is also no merit to the plaintiffs contention that improper evidence was presented to the jury by the defendant’s counsel during his questioning of a witness (see generally, Figueroa v Kozminsky, 59 AD2d 521).

The plaintiffs claim with respect to the instructions to the jury is unpreserved for appellate review (see, Harris v Armstrong, 64 NY2d 700; Brodeur v Cooper, 182 AD2d 666). Mangano, P. J., Bracken, Luciano and Smith, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

270 A.D.2d 454, 705 N.Y.S.2d 274, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3176, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gibbons-v-ostrow-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack