Login
  • Bookmark
  • PDF
  • Share
  • CaseIQ

DeVIVO v. PERDUE

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department.
Nov 28, 1988

Ordered that the judgment and order are affirmed, with one bill of costs.

We conclude that the trial court acted properly in denying the plaintiff's motion to set aside the jury verdict in favor of the defendant. Given the testimony adduced at trial, the jury could have concluded, on a fair interpretation of the evidence, that the defendant exercised due care when he made his left turn into the intersection where the accident occurred (see, Vehicle and Traffic Law ยง 1141; McNierney v. Zara Contr. Co., 125 A.D.2d 456; Bogorad v. Fitzpatrick, 38 A.D.2d 923, affd 31 N.Y.2d 984; Olson v. Dougherty, 128 A.D.2d 920; cf., Kiernan v. Edwards, 97 A.D.2d 750; Lester v. Jolicofur, 120 A.D.2d 574). Lawrence, J.P., Spatt, Sullivan and Balletta, JJ., concur.