Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.
The defendant's contention that the court erred in refusing to charge the jury on comparative negligence is unpreserved for appellate review ( see CPLR 4110-b). In any event, the contention is without merit as there was insufficient evidence in the record to support such a charge ( see Arpino v. Jovin C. Lombardo, P.C., 215 AD2d 614; O'Connor v. Graziosi, 131 AD2d 553).
The defendant's further contention that the verdict was against the weight of the evidence is similarly without merit ( see Simmons v. East Nassau Med. Group, 260 AD2d 463; Nussbaum v. Gibstein, 138 AD2d 193, revd on other grounds 73 NY2d 912).
The jury's award did not deviate materially from what would be reasonable compensation ( see Sutch v. Yarinsky, 292 AD2d 715; Lopez v. Bautista, 287 AD2d 601; Motichka v. Cody, 279 AD2d 310; King v. Jordan, 265 AD2d 619; Baez v. Dombroff, 142 AD2d 705).
The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit ( see Roseingrave v. Massapequa Gen. Hosp., 298 AD2d 377; Cerasuoli v. Brevetti, 166 AD2d 403).