Neiger v. Perlstein

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Neiger v. Perlstein

182 A.D.2d 615

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

DecidedApril 6, 1992

StatusPublished

This text of 182 A.D.2d 615 (Neiger v. Perlstein) 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

Neiger v. Perlstein, 182 A.D.2d 615 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendant appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (G. Aronin, J.), dated June 22, 1990, which, upon a jury verdict, is in favor of the plaintiffs and against him in the principal sum of $600,000.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

We reject the defendant’s claim that the verdict finding him 100% at fault in the happening of the accident was against the weight of the evidence. The issue of credibility was resolved against the defendant by the jurors, whose determination is supported by a fair interpretation of the evidence (see, Holt v New York City Tr. Auth., 151 AD2d 460; Capone v Gannon, 150 AD2d 749).

Further, the verdict as to damages was not excessive. The

amount of damages to be awarded is primarily a question of fact for the jury (see, O’Connor v Sears Roebuck & Co., 170 AD2d 660). Here, the amount of damages awarded did not deviate materially from what would be reasonable compensation (see, CPLR 5501 [c]).

We have reviewed the defendant’s remaining contentions and find they do not require reversal. Harwood, J. P., Fiber, Ritter and Copertino, 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, etc., the defendant appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (G. Aronin, J.), dated June 22, 1990, which, upon a jury verdict, is in favor of the plaintiffs and against him in the principal sum of $600,000.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

We reject the defendant’s claim that the verdict finding him 100% at fault in the happening of the accident was against the weight of the evidence. The issue of credibility was resolved against the defendant by the jurors, whose determination is supported by a fair interpretation of the evidence (see, Holt v New York City Tr. Auth., 151 AD2d 460; Capone v Gannon, 150 AD2d 749).

Further, the verdict as to damages was not excessive. The

amount of damages to be awarded is primarily a question of fact for the jury (see, O’Connor v Sears Roebuck & Co., 170 AD2d 660). Here, the amount of damages awarded did not deviate materially from what would be reasonable compensation (see, CPLR 5501 [c]).

We have reviewed the defendant’s remaining contentions and find they do not require reversal. Harwood, J. P., Fiber, Ritter and Copertino, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

182 A.D.2d 615, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/neiger-v-perlstein-nyappdiv-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack