McDonald v. We're Associates Co.

290 A.D.2d 422, 736 N.Y.S.2d 82, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 337
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided January 14, 2002·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Werner, J.), entered April 5, 2001, which, upon a jury verdict determining that the accident was not a proximate cause of [423]*423her injuries, and upon the denial of her motion to set aside the verdict, is in favor of the defendants and against her.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

It is well settled that a jury verdict will not be set aside as against the weight of the evidence unless the jury could not have reached its verdict on any fair interpretation of the evidence (see, Mazza v O’Keefe, 275 AD2d 696; Senno v Picture Cars E., 275 AD2d 315; Nicastro v Park, 113 AD2d 129). In view of the conflicting expert opinion as to whether the plaintiff sustained a disc injury as a result of the subject accident, and the evidence that the plaintiff had suffered back injuries in two prior accidents, the jury’s determination that the subject accident was not the proximate cause of the plaintiffs injuries is supported by a fair interpretation of the evidence (see, Senno v Picture Cars E., supra; Syrkett v Burden, 176 AD2d 938; Zapata v Dagostino, 265 AD2d 324; Herring v Hayes, 135 AD2d 684). Feuerstein, J.P., Krausman, Friedmann and Schmidt, JJ., concur.

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

McDonald v. We're Associates Co., 290 A.D.2d 422, 736 N.Y.S.2d 82, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 337 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

290 A.D.2d 422 (McDonald v. We're Associates Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Canonico v. Beechmont Bus Service, Inc.
15 A.D.3d 327 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2005)