Rodriguez v. Valley Transit, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Rodriguez v. Valley Transit, Inc.

273 A.D.2d 456, 712 N.Y.S.2d 355, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7359

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

DecidedJune 26, 2000

StatusPublished

This text of 273 A.D.2d 456 (Rodriguez v. Valley Transit, 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

Rodriguez v. Valley Transit, Inc., 273 A.D.2d 456, 712 N.Y.S.2d 355, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7359 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiffs appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (DiNoto, J.), entered February 17, 1999, which, upon a jury verdict in favor of the defendants, inter alia, is in favor of the defendants and against them, dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the plaintiffs’ contention, the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence, but was supported by a fair interpretation of the evidence (see, Nicastro v Park, 113 AD2d 129). The plaintiffs’ remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review, without merit, or do not warrant reversal. Bracken, J. P., Sullivan, Altman and Krausman, 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 plaintiffs appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (DiNoto, J.), entered February 17, 1999, which, upon a jury verdict in favor of the defendants, inter alia, is in favor of the defendants and against them, dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the plaintiffs’ contention, the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence, but was supported by a fair interpretation of the evidence (see, Nicastro v Park, 113 AD2d 129). The plaintiffs’ remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review, without merit, or do not warrant reversal. Bracken, J. P., Sullivan, Altman and Krausman, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

273 A.D.2d 456, 712 N.Y.S.2d 355, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7359, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rodriguez-v-valley-transit-inc-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack