Voiclis v. International Ass'n of Machinist & Aerospace Workers

239 A.D.2d 339, 657 N.Y.S.2d 1008, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4598
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMay 5, 1997
StatusPublished
Cited by12 cases

This text of 239 A.D.2d 339 (Voiclis v. International Ass'n of Machinist & Aerospace Workers) 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
Voiclis v. International Ass'n of Machinist & Aerospace Workers, 239 A.D.2d 339, 657 N.Y.S.2d 1008, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4598 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendant International Association of Machinist and Aerospace Workers, Suffolk Lodge No. 1470 appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (De Maro, J.), dated May 15, 1996, which granted the plaintiffs’ motion pursuant to CPLR 4404 (a) to set aside the jury verdict in its favor and directed a new trial.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law and the facts, with costs, the plaintiffs’ motion is denied, and the jury verdict is reinstated.

A jury verdict should not be set aside as against the weight of the evidence unless the jury could not have reached its verdict on any fair interpretation of the evidence (see, Lolik v Big V Supermarkets, 86 NY2d 744, 746; Nicastro v Park, 113 AD2d 129, 134). Great deference is accorded to the fact-finding function of the jury, and determinations regarding the credibility of witnesses are for the fact-finders, who had the opportunity to see and hear the witness (see, Corcoran v People’s [340]*340Ambulette Serv., 237 AD2d 402). A review of the evidence in this case demonstrates that a fair basis existed for the verdict in the appellant’s favor. Consequently, the verdict should not have been disturbed (see, Corcoran v People’s Ambulette Serv., supra).

The plaintiffs’ remaining contentions are without merit. Bracken, J. P., Santucci, Altman and Krausman, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Acosta v. City of New York
2017 NY Slip Op 6241 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2017)
Walters v. Nicklin
29 A.D.3d 782 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2006)
Bertelle v. New York City Transit Authority
19 A.D.3d 343 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2005)
Hospodar-Anikin v. City of New York
12 A.D.3d 405 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2004)
Jones v. Curry
303 A.D.2d 461 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2003)
Turner v. Sixtieth Street Automotive Service Corp.
299 A.D.2d 477 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2002)
John Burns Property Corp. v. Fantasy Party People, Ltd.
289 A.D.2d 452 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2001)
Miller v. Long Island Rail Road
286 A.D.2d 713 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2001)
Bulvas v. Dubrowsky
277 A.D.2d 338 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2000)
Saidoff v. Cummings
273 A.D.2d 218 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2000)
Laskowsky v. Sullivan
272 A.D.2d 299 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2000)
Anderson v. Grimes
270 A.D.2d 371 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2000)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
239 A.D.2d 339, 657 N.Y.S.2d 1008, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4598, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/voiclis-v-international-assn-of-machinist-aerospace-workers-nyappdiv-1997.