Judgment affirmed, with costs.
This action involved an automobile accident which occurred in New Jersey. When dealing with procedural matters, such as appealability, the burden of proof, and the weight and sufficiency of evidence, the law of the forum, in this instance, New York, governs ( Able Cycle Engines v. Allstate Ins. Co., 84 A.D.2d 140; Jackson v. Coggan, 330 F. Supp. 1060). Therefore, in a case such as this, where there is conflicting testimony regarding the circumstances surrounding the accident, since the jury's verdict is supported by a fair interpretation of the evidence, we will not set it aside ( Pettersen v. Curreri, 99 A.D.2d 774; Sorokin v Food Fair Stores, 51 A.D.2d 592).
As to plaintiffs' contention that a portion of the trial court's jury charge was erroneous, plaintiffs, having failed to object to that portion of the instruction on the ground raised on appeal, have not preserved the issue for review (CPLR 4110-b; Piro v. Bowen, 76 A.D.2d 392). This is particularly true where, as here, plaintiffs requested a charge substantially similar to the one given ( Rupert v. Sellers, 50 N.Y.2d 881). O'Connor, J.P., Weinstein, Brown and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.