Practice point: The Appellate Division affirmed plaintiff's motion, pursuant to CPLR 4404, to set aside the verdict as contrary to the weight of the evidence, and for a new trial. The Appellate Division determined that a fair interpretation of the evidence does not support the
jury's finding that the defendant was not negligent. The defendant
testified that, when she was stopped at the intersection, her view to
her left, the direction from which the injured plaintiff was coming, was
obstructed, and yet she proceeded. The fact that the defendant
proceeded into the intersection without having a clear view of the
traffic and without yielding the right-of-way after a
stop sign demonstrated that she violated Vehicle and Traffic Law §§
1142(a) and 1172(a). The jury could not properly disregard these violations, as they constitute negligence as a matter of law.
Student note: A jury verdict will not be set aside as contrary to the weight of
the evidence unless the jury could not have reached its verdict on any
fair interpretation of the evidence. It is within the province of the jury to determine
issues of credibility, and great deference is accorded to the jury given
its opportunity to see and hear the witnesses.
Case:
Zhubrak v. Petro, NY Slip Op 08332 (2d Dept. 2014)
Here is the decision.
Tomorrow's issue: Reviewing a Court of Claims determination in a slip-and-fall action.
