Roth v. Ettinger

251 A.D.2d 644, 676 N.Y.S.2d 478, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7943

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Shaw, J.), entered September 9, 1997, which, upon a jury verdict, is in favor of the defendants dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The jury’s verdict, which found that the defendants were negligent, but that their negligence was not a proximate cause of the damages alleged, is not inconsistent and is supported by a fair interpretation of the evidence (see, Keegan v Prout, 215 AD2d 629; see also, Nicastro v Park, 113 AD2d 129, 134).

The plaintiffs’ remaining contention is without merit. Rosenblatt, J. P., O’Brien, Ritter and Krausman, JJ., concur.

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

Roth v. Ettinger, 251 A.D.2d 644, 676 N.Y.S.2d 478, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7943 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

251 A.D.2d 644 (Roth v. Ettinger) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Nicastro v. Park
113 A.D.2d 129 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1985)
Keegan v. Prout
215 A.D.2d 629 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1995)