Moskowitz v. Federated Department Stores, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Moskowitz v. Federated Department Stores, Inc.

299 A.D.2d 400, 749 N.Y.S.2d 442

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

DecidedNovember 12, 2002

StatusPublished

This text of 299 A.D.2d 400 (Moskowitz v. Federated Department Stores, Inc.) 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

Moskowitz v. Federated Department Stores, Inc., 299 A.D.2d 400, 749 N.Y.S.2d 442 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Schulman, J.), entered May 3, 2001, which, upon a jury verdict in favor of the defendants and against her and upon the denial of her oral application to set aside the verdict as against the weight of the evidence, dismissed the complaint.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The conclusion of the jury, which was in the best position to assess the credibility of the witnesses, that the defendants’ negligence was not a substantial factor in causing the accident is based upon a fair interpretation of the evidence. Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied the plaintiff’s application to set aside the verdict as against the weight of the evidence (see Aprea v Franco, 292 AD2d 478; Nicastro v Park, 113 AD2d 129, 133).

The plaintiff’s remaining contention is unpreserved for appellate review. Florio, J.P., Krausman, Townes and Crane, 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, Queens County (Schulman, J.), entered May 3, 2001, which, upon a jury verdict in favor of the defendants and against her and upon the denial of her oral application to set aside the verdict as against the weight of the evidence, dismissed the complaint.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The conclusion of the jury, which was in the best position to assess the credibility of the witnesses, that the defendants’ negligence was not a substantial factor in causing the accident is based upon a fair interpretation of the evidence. Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied the plaintiff’s application to set aside the verdict as against the weight of the evidence (see Aprea v Franco, 292 AD2d 478; Nicastro v Park, 113 AD2d 129, 133).

The plaintiff’s remaining contention is unpreserved for appellate review. Florio, J.P., Krausman, Townes and Crane, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

299 A.D.2d 400, 749 N.Y.S.2d 442, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/moskowitz-v-federated-department-stores-inc-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack