From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Augustine v.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Jun 10, 2014
118 A.D.3d 475 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014)

Opinion

2014-06-10

Anjali AUGUSTINE, et al., Plaintiffs–Appellants, v. NEW YORK CITY TRANSIT AUTHORITY, Defendant–Respondent.

Kramer & Pollack, LLP, Mineola (Joshua D. Pollack of counsel), for appellants. Wallace D. Gossett, Brooklyn (Jane Shufer of counsel), for respondent.


Kramer & Pollack, LLP, Mineola (Joshua D. Pollack of counsel), for appellants. Wallace D. Gossett, Brooklyn (Jane Shufer of counsel), for respondent.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Cynthia Kern, J.), entered February 27, 2012, which denied plaintiffs' motion to set aside the jury's verdict in favor of defendant, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The motion court properly found that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence ( see generally McDermott v. Coffee Beanery, Ltd., 9 A.D.3d 195, 206, 777 N.Y.S.2d 103 [1st Dept.2004] ). The jury weighed the credibility of the witnesses and the evidence, and its determination was based upon a fair interpretation of the evidence ( see Williams v. City of New York, 109 A.D.3d 744, 971 N.Y.S.2d 442 [1st Dept.2013]; White v. New York City Tr. Auth., 40 A.D.3d 297, 836 N.Y.S.2d 82 [1st Dept.2007] ). GONZALEZ, P.J., SWEENY, MOSKOWITZ, FREEDMAN, KAPNICK, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Augustine v.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Jun 10, 2014
118 A.D.3d 475 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014)
Case details for

Augustine v.

Case Details

Full title:Anjali AUGUSTINE, et al., Plaintiffs–Appellants, v. NEW YORK CITY TRANSIT…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

Date published: Jun 10, 2014

Citations

118 A.D.3d 475 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014)
2014 N.Y. Slip Op. 4131
987 N.Y.S.2d 131

Citing Cases

M.M. v. Weissler

In light of the above, the jury's "determination was based on upon a fair interpretation of the evidence,"…

Atkins v. Metronome Events, Inc.

In light of the above, the jury's "determination was based on upon a fair interpretation of the evidence."…