Accurso v. Forest City Enterprises

• Decision Date: 16 June 2000
• Citation: 710 N.Y.S.2d 261,273 A.D.2d 820
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
• Parties: ANTHONY ACCURSO et al., Appellants,<BR>v.<BR>FOREST CITY ENTERPRISES, Respondent.

273 A.D.2d 820

710 N.Y.S.2d 261

ANTHONY ACCURSO et al., Appellants,

v.FOREST CITY ENTERPRISES, Respondent.

Decided June 16, 2000.

Present — Green, J.P., Hayes, Kehoe and Lawton, JJ.

Order unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum:

Supreme Court properly denied plaintiffs' motion pursuant to CPLR 4404 (a) to set aside the jury verdict as against the weight of the evidence. "A jury's verdict is not against the weight of the evidence unless utterly irrational and unsupported by a fair interpretation of the evidence" (Lillis v D'Souza, 174 AD2d 976, 977, lv denied 78 NY2d 858; see generally, Cohen v Hallmark Cards, 45 NY2d 493, 498-499). The jury properly evaluated the conflicting expert testimony and the credibility of the other witnesses (see, Hall v Prestige Remodeling & Home Repair Serv., 192 AD2d 1098; Delay v Rhinehart, 176 AD2d 1211; Lillis v D'Souza, supra, at 977). The record establishes that the jury's verdict is rational and supported by a fair interpretation of the evidence, which included testimony from defendant's expert that the injuries of plaintiff Anthony Accurso were not caused by his fall on January 5, 1994.