Walker v. Prince

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Walker v. Prince

266 A.D.2d 27, 697 N.Y.S.2d 607, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11180

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

DecidedNovember 4, 1999

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 266 A.D.2d 27 (Walker v. Prince) 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

Walker v. Prince, 266 A.D.2d 27, 697 N.Y.S.2d 607, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11180 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Carol Huff, J.), entered July 17, 1998, awarding plaintiff the principal amount of $150,000, after a jury trial on the issue of damages in a personal injury action, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Defendant’s contention that the verdict was against the weight of the evidence is without merit, since the verdict was based on a fair interpretation of the evidence (Hoffson v Orentreich, 168 AD2d 243, 244). Objective medical evidence established that plaintiff suffered a serious injury as a result of the 1994 automobile accident. The jury was entitled to reject the testimony of the defense witnesses to the extent that they concluded that plaintiff’s condition was pre-existing.

Defendant’s contention that the verdict demonstrated confusion on the part of the jurors is unpreserved. Were we to review this claim, we would find it to be without merit, since the charge as submitted, with no exception taken, permitted the jurors to find rationally both that plaintiff suffered a permanent injury and that an award of future damages was not warranted.

We have considered defendant’s other contentions and find [28]*28them to be unavailing. Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Williams, Tom, Mazzarelli and Saxe, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Carol Huff, J.), entered July 17, 1998, awarding plaintiff the principal amount of $150,000, after a jury trial on the issue of damages in a personal injury action, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Defendant’s contention that the verdict was against the weight of the evidence is without merit, since the verdict was based on a fair interpretation of the evidence (Hoffson v Orentreich, 168 AD2d 243, 244). Objective medical evidence established that plaintiff suffered a serious injury as a result of the 1994 automobile accident. The jury was entitled to reject the testimony of the defense witnesses to the extent that they concluded that plaintiff’s condition was pre-existing.

Defendant’s contention that the verdict demonstrated confusion on the part of the jurors is unpreserved. Were we to review this claim, we would find it to be without merit, since the charge as submitted, with no exception taken, permitted the jurors to find rationally both that plaintiff suffered a permanent injury and that an award of future damages was not warranted.

We have considered defendant’s other contentions and find [28]*28them to be unavailing. Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Williams, Tom, Mazzarelli and Saxe, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

266 A.D.2d 27, 697 N.Y.S.2d 607, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11180, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/walker-v-prince-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack