Smith v. Tadsen

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Smith v. Tadsen

265 A.D.2d 863, 696 N.Y.S.2d 320, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9954

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

DecidedOctober 1, 1999

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 265 A.D.2d 863 (Smith v. Tadsen) 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

Smith v. Tadsen, 265 A.D.2d 863, 696 N.Y.S.2d 320, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9954 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order unanimously reversed on the law without costs, motion denied and verdict reinstated. Memorandum: Supreme Court erred in granting plaintiffs motion to set aside a jury verdict of no cause of action as against the weight of the evidence. “The standard for determining whether a jury’s verdict is against the weight of the evidence is whether 6 “ ‘the evidence so preponderate [d] in favor of the [plaintiff] that [the verdict] could not have been reached on any fair interpretation of the evidence’ ” ’ ” (Wesolek v Tops Mkts., 255 AD2d 972, 973, quoting Lolik v Big V Supermarkets, 86 NY2d 744, 746). In this case, a fair interpretation of the evidence supports the jury’s finding that defendant was not negligent. The jury could reasonably have credited the testimony of defendant and defendant’s expert engineer that plaintiffs daughter did not cross the street at the intersection and that she ran in front of defendant’s vehicle. (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Bergin, J. — Set Aside Verdict.) Present — Law-ton, J. P., Hayes, Wisner, Pigott, Jr., and Balio, JJ.

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

—Order unanimously reversed on the law without costs, motion denied and verdict reinstated. Memorandum: Supreme Court erred in granting plaintiffs motion to set aside a jury verdict of no cause of action as against the weight of the evidence. “The standard for determining whether a jury’s verdict is against the weight of the evidence is whether 6 “ ‘the evidence so preponderate [d] in favor of the [plaintiff] that [the verdict] could not have been reached on any fair interpretation of the evidence’ ” ’ ” (Wesolek v Tops Mkts., 255 AD2d 972, 973, quoting Lolik v Big V Supermarkets, 86 NY2d 744, 746). In this case, a fair interpretation of the evidence supports the jury’s finding that defendant was not negligent. The jury could reasonably have credited the testimony of defendant and defendant’s expert engineer that plaintiffs daughter did not cross the street at the intersection and that she ran in front of defendant’s vehicle. (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Bergin, J. — Set Aside Verdict.) Present — Law-ton, J. P., Hayes, Wisner, Pigott, Jr., and Balio, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

265 A.D.2d 863, 696 N.Y.S.2d 320, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9954, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smith-v-tadsen-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack