AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes

HAROLD KRAUS et al., Respondents, v. CHAIM ROTEM et al., Appellants.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

Due to the defendants' failure to register an objection to the jury's verdict on the ground of inconsistency prior to the dismissal of the jury, at which time corrective measures could have been taken, their contention that the verdict was inconsistent is unpreserved for appellate review ( see, Barry v. Manglass, 55 N.Y.2d 803). In any event, the verdict "was not necessarily inconsistent, in light of the law as it was defined to the jury by the trial court" ( Barone v. City of Mount Vernon, 170 A.D.2d 557, 558).

The damages awarded did not deviate materially from what would be reasonable compensation ( see, CPLR 5501 [c]).

Altman, J.P., Krausman, Florio and Luciano, JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

KRAUS v. CHAIM ROTEM
(Apr 13, 1998)