DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
The plaintiff's contention that the verdict in favor of the defendant Jeffrey Lucas was not based on legally sufficient evidence is without merit, as the evidence presented at the trial provided a rational basis for the jury determination ( see Cohen v. Hallmark Cards, 45 N.Y.2d 493, 499; Miller v. Long Is. R. R., 286 A.D.2d 713, 714; Altman v. Alpha Obstetrics Gynecology, 255 A.D.2d 276, 277). In addition, the plaintiff's contention that the verdict was inconsistent is unpreserved for appellate review because she failed to object on that ground prior to the release of the jurors ( see Barry v. Manglass, 55 N.Y.2d 803, 806; Delacruz v. Galaxy Elec., 300 A.D.2d 278; Miller v. Long Is. R. R., supra). In any event, the claim of inconsistency is without merit because the verdict can be reconciled with a reasonable view of the evidence ( see Miglino v. Supermarkets Gen. Corp., 243 A.D.2d 451; Rubin v. Pecoraro, 141 A.D.2d 525, 526). Finally, the verdict in favor of the defendant Lucas is supported by a fair interpretation of the evidence ( see Nicastro v. Park, 113 A.D.2d 129, 134).
SMITH, J.P., McGINITY, H. MILLER and RIVERA, JJ., concur.