Newman v. Mack

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Newman v. Mack

178 A.D.2d 405, 576 N.Y.S.2d 806, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15290

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

DecidedDecember 2, 1991

StatusPublished

This text of 178 A.D.2d 405 (Newman v. Mack) 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

Newman v. Mack, 178 A.D.2d 405, 576 N.Y.S.2d 806, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15290 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (McCabe, J.), entered October 17, 1989, which, upon a jury verdict in favor of the defendant on the issue of liability, dismissed the complaint.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

It cannot be said that the jury could not have reached its verdict on any fair interpretation of the evidence presented (see, Nicastro v Park, 113 AD2d 129, 134; Hershkowitz v Saint Michel, 143 AD2d 809). Accordingly, the trial court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying the plaintiff’s posttrial motion to set aside the verdict as being contrary to the weight of the evidence (see, CPLR 4404 [a]). Thompson, J. P., Rosenblatt, Miller and Ritter, 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, Nassau County (McCabe, J.), entered October 17, 1989, which, upon a jury verdict in favor of the defendant on the issue of liability, dismissed the complaint.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

It cannot be said that the jury could not have reached its verdict on any fair interpretation of the evidence presented (see, Nicastro v Park, 113 AD2d 129, 134; Hershkowitz v Saint Michel, 143 AD2d 809). Accordingly, the trial court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying the plaintiff’s posttrial motion to set aside the verdict as being contrary to the weight of the evidence (see, CPLR 4404 [a]). Thompson, J. P., Rosenblatt, Miller and Ritter, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

178 A.D.2d 405, 576 N.Y.S.2d 806, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15290, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/newman-v-mack-nyappdiv-1991.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack