Mosher v. Osborne

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Mosher v. Osborne

55 A.D.2d 842, 390 N.Y.S.2d 332, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15660

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided December 17, 1976·Published

Opinion

Judgment unanimously affirmed, without costs. Memorandum: The sole question on this appeal is the adequacy of the jury’s verdict in this personal injury action. There was a wide difference of opinion as to the extent of plaintiffs injuries and the extent to which they would be disabling in the future. Accepting the facts in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party, as we must, the verdict is not unconscionable and should not be set aside (Mansfield v Graff, 47 AD2d 581, 582). (Appeal from judgment of Erie Supreme Court—automobile negligence.) Present—Marsh, P. J., Moule, Cardamone, Simons and Mahoney, JJ.

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

Judgment unanimously affirmed, without costs. Memorandum: The sole question on this appeal is the adequacy of the jury’s verdict in this personal injury action. There was a wide difference of opinion as to the extent of plaintiffs injuries and the extent to which they would be disabling in the future. Accepting the facts in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party, as we must, the verdict is not unconscionable and should not be set aside (Mansfield v Graff, 47 AD2d 581, 582). (Appeal from judgment of Erie Supreme Court—automobile negligence.) Present—Marsh, P. J., Moule, Cardamone, Simons and Mahoney, JJ.

Mosher v. Osborne, 55 A.D.2d 842, 390 N.Y.S.2d 332, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15660 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

55 A.D.2d 842 (Mosher v. Osborne) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related