DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.
A jury verdict is entitled to great deference and should only be set aside as against the weight of the evidence when it could not have been reached on any fair interpretation of the evidence ( see Lolik v. Big V Supermarkets, 86 N.Y.2d 744, 746; Asaro v. Micali, 292 A.D.2d 552, 553). Contrary to the plaintiffs' contention, a fair interpretation of the evidence supports the verdict in favor of the defendant City of New York. The jury reasonably could have concluded that the Big Apple Pothole Sidewalk Protection Corporation map submitted by the plaintiffs as evidence of the City's prior written notice was illegible and therefore insufficient to bring the particular sidewalk defect at issue to the City's attention ( see Quinn v. City of New York, 305 A.D.2d 570, 571; Vasquez v. City of New York, 298 A.D.2d 187; see also Blas v. R.M.H. Realty Corp., 5 A.D.3d 416; Patane v. City of New York, 284 A.D.2d 513, 514; David v. City of New York, 267 A.D.2d 419).
SMITH, J.P., KRAUSMAN, ADAMS and SKELOS, JJ., concur.