Himed v. Grady

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Himed v. Grady

243 A.D.2d 402, 664 N.Y.S.2d 554, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10790

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

DecidedOctober 28, 1997

StatusPublished

This text of 243 A.D.2d 402 (Himed v. Grady) 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

Himed v. Grady, 243 A.D.2d 402, 664 N.Y.S.2d 554, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10790 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Barbara Kapnick, J.), entered August 29, 1996, which, after a jury trial, awarded plaintiff the principal sum of $131,548, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

The verdict is supported by a fair interpretation of the evidence (see, Martin v McLaughlin, 162 AD2d 181, 184) and we decline to disturb it. It was for the jury to determine what weight, if any, should be given the very limited testimony of the police witness (see, Klein v Benrubi, 60 AD2d 548, 548-549). We also decline to reduce the award since it does not deviate materially from what is reasonable compensation under the circumstances (see, CPLR 5501 [c]). We have considered defendant’s remaining arguments and find them to be without merit. Concur—Ellerin, J. P., Rubin, Tom, Mazzarelli and Andrias, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Barbara Kapnick, J.), entered August 29, 1996, which, after a jury trial, awarded plaintiff the principal sum of $131,548, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

The verdict is supported by a fair interpretation of the evidence (see, Martin v McLaughlin, 162 AD2d 181, 184) and we decline to disturb it. It was for the jury to determine what weight, if any, should be given the very limited testimony of the police witness (see, Klein v Benrubi, 60 AD2d 548, 548-549). We also decline to reduce the award since it does not deviate materially from what is reasonable compensation under the circumstances (see, CPLR 5501 [c]). We have considered defendant’s remaining arguments and find them to be without merit. Concur—Ellerin, J. P., Rubin, Tom, Mazzarelli and Andrias, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

243 A.D.2d 402, 664 N.Y.S.2d 554, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10790, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/himed-v-grady-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack