Summary
The Appellate Division, Second Department reversed a judgment dismissing the plaintiff's personal-injury action arising from demolition work and reinstated the complaint. The court held that the jury's verdict in favor of the defendants could not have been reached on any fair interpretation of the evidence and remitted the matter for a new trial.
Holdings
- The verdict in favor of defendants could not have been reached on any fair interpretation of the evidence and therefore had to be set aside.
- There is no preservation requirement for appellate review of a verdict as contrary to the weight of the evidence.
Questions Presented
- Whether the jury's verdict in favor of defendants could stand when the evidence did not fairly support the verdict.
- Whether appellate review of the verdict as contrary to the weight of the evidence was subject to a preservation requirement.
Disposition
reversed_and_remanded
Cases Cited (4)
- Lolik v Big V Supermarkets, 86 NY2d 744, 746(followed)
- Krohn v Schultz Ford Lincoln, Inc., ____ AD3d ____, ____, 2025 NY Slip Op 05072, *4(cited)
- Evans v New York City Tr. Auth., 179 AD3d 105, 111-113(followed)
- Perez v Paljevic, 31 AD3d 520, 521-522(cited)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…