DISLA v. DHL AIRWAYS, INC

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiff's claim regarding the inconsistency of the verdict is unpreserved for appellate review (see, Gross v Fontano, 206 A.D.2d 505). In any event, the verdict was not inconsistent (see, Rubin v Pecoraro, 141 A.D.2d 525).

Further, the jury's findings were not against the weight of the evidence, as they were supported by a fair interpretation of the evidence (see, Briccio v Disbrow, 212 A.D.2d 565; Moskowitz v Israel, 209 A.D.2d 676). Sullivan, J.P., Miller, Thompson and Ritter, JJ., concur.