Upon viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, we find that plaintiff's causes of action for false arrest and malicious prosecution were properly submitted to the jury given the existence of a real dispute as to the facts (see, Parkin v Cornell Univ., 78 N.Y.2d 523, 529).
We agree with Appellate Term that the award for false arrest deviates materially from reasonable compensation and was properly reduced (CPLR 5501 [c]; see, e.g., Bert v Port Auth., 166 A.D.2d 351; Hallenbeck v City of Albany, 99 A.D.2d 639). Similarly, the $150,000 compensatory award for malicious prosecution should not be disturbed. There is sufficient evidence to support the jury's finding that the arresting officer had knowingly provided false testimony to the Grand Jury resulting in plaintiff's indictment and incarceration (see, Maxwell v City of New York, 156 A.D.2d 28).
Finally, we concur with the Appellate Term that the award for punitive damages was excessive to the extent indicated.
The unpublished order of this Court entered herein on May 21, 1992 is hereby recalled and vacated.
Concur — Milonas, J.P., Ellerin, Kupferman and Ross, JJ.
The $150,000 award for malicious prosecution was untouched.