Login
  • Bookmark
  • PDF
  • Share
  • CaseIQ

ROMAN v. BROOKLYN NAVY YARD DEV. CORP

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department.
Jun 30, 2009
Important Paras
Please sign up to view Important Paras.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

Before granting a motion pursuant to CPLR 4404 (a) to set aside a verdict and for judgment as a matter of law, the trial court must conclude that there is "simply no valid line of reasoning and permissible inferences which could possibly lead rational [people] to the conclusion reached by the jury on the basis of the evidence at trial" ( Cohen v Hallmark Cards, 45 NY2d 493, 499; see Firmes v Chase Manhattan Auto. Fin. Corp., 50 AD3d 18, 29). Here, there is a rational view of the evidence that supports the jury's award for future medical expenses ( see Ayala v Lindy's Dispatching, Inc., 54 AD3d 699, 700; White v Kim, 29 AD3d 685; Martelli v City of New York, 219 AD2d 586). Moreover, the jury's award for future medical expenses was based upon a fair interpretation of the evidence, and thus, was not contrary to the weight of the evidence ( see Scibelli v Eugene G. Herman, D.M.D., P.C., 49 AD3d 627; Nicastro v Park, 113 AD2d 129, 134).