Opinion
May 30, 1997
Present — Pine, J.P., Lawton, Doerr, Boehm and Fallon, JJ.
Judgment unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Plaintiffs failed to object to the verdict as inconsistent before the jury was discharged, when Supreme Court could have taken corrective action. "Because the issue was not raised until long after any steps could have been taken by the trial court to cure the inconsistency, it cannot serve as a predicate for a reversal" (Barry v. Manglass, 55 N.Y.2d 803, 806, rearg denied 55 N.Y.2d 1039; see, Stangl v. Compass Transp., 221 A.D.2d 909; Gross v. Fontano, 206 A.D.2d 505). To the extent that plaintiffs' posttrial motion may be construed as alleging that the verdict is against the weight of the evidence (see, CPLR 4404[a]), the motion was properly denied. We further conclude that the court did not abuse its discretion in permitting defendants' medical expert to testify at trial (see, Peck u Tired Iron Transp., 209 A.D.2d 979; Marra v Hensonville Frozen Food Lockers, 189 A.D.2d 1004, 1005-1006). (Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County, Sedita, Jr., J. — Damages.)