DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.
The jury verdict that the surgery performed by the defendant was not a proximate cause of the plaintiff's injuries was based on a fair interpretation of the credible evidence and should not be disturbed ( see Nicastro v. Park, 113 A.D.2d 129). It is well settled that a jury's resolution of conflicting expert testimony is entitled to great weight, since it is the jury that had the opportunity to observe and hear the experts ( see Bobek v. Crystal, 291 A.D.2d 521, 522, lv denied 100 N.Y.2d 505).
The plaintiff's remaining contentions either are unpreserved for appellate review or without merit.
ALTMAN, J.P., GOLDSTEIN, ADAMS and MASTRO, JJ., concur.