Schiskie v. Fernan, 277 A.D.2d 441 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000). · Go Syfert
Search
Schiskie v. Fernan, 277 A.D.2d 441 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
15 citation events (15 in the last 25 years) across 3 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Marzano v. YSF Realty Corp. (nyappterm, 2006-07-03)
Top citers, strongest first. 3 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see" Marzano v. YSF Realty Corp.
N.Y. App. Term. · 2006 · signal: see · confidence high
Plaintiff appeals from said judgment and contends that the court erred in setting aside the jury’s award for past loss of overtime wages. “ ‘[T]he standard for determining whether a jury verdict is against the weight of the evidence is whether the evidence so preponderated in favor of the movant that the verdict could not have been reached on any fair interpretation of the evidence’ (Torres v Esaian, 5 AD3d 670, 671 [2004]; see generally Schiskie v Fernan, 277 AD2d 441 [2000]; Nicastro v Park, 113 AD2d 129 [1985])” (Harris v Marlow, 18 AD3d 608, 610 [2005]).
discussed Cited "see" Harris v. Marlow
N.Y. App. Div. · 2005 · signal: see · confidence high
These appeals followed. “[T]he standard for determining whether a jury verdict is against the weight of the evidence is whether the evidence so preponderated in favor of the movant that the verdict could not have been reached on any fair interpretation of the evidence” (Torres v Esaian, 5 AD3d 670, 671 [2004]; see generally Schiskie v Fernan, 277 AD2d 441 [2000]; Nicastro v Park, 113 AD2d 129 [1985]).
discussed Cited "see" Ustilovskaya v. Cohen
N.Y. App. Div. · 2003 · signal: see · confidence high
Affording the defendant “every inference which may properly be drawn from the facts presented” and considering the facts “in a light most favorable to the [defendant],” the evidence supported a rational process by which the jury could find in favor of the defendant (Szczerbiak v Pilot, 90 NY2d 553, 556 [1997]; see Schiskie v Fernan, 277 AD2d 441 [2000]).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Rosita M. Schiskie
v.
Barbara L. Fernan
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York.
Nov 27, 2000.
277 A.D.2d 441
Cited by 14 opinions  |  Published

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (LaCava, J.), entered July 23, 1999, which, upon a jury verdict finding her to be 100% at fault in the happening of the accident, and upon the denial of her motion pursuant to CPLR 4404 to set aside the verdict, dismissed the complaint.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

A verdict should not be set aside as against the weight of the evidence unless the evidence so preponderates in favor of the moving party that it could not have been reached upon any fair interpretation of the evidence (see, Nicastro v Park, 113 AD2d 129). Contrary to the plaintiffs contention, the Supreme Court properly denied her motion to set aside the verdict, since it could have been reached on a fair interpretation of the evidence. A vehicle approaching an intersection must yield the right-of-way to a vehicle already in the intersection. Even where, as here, a driver has a green light in his or her favor, he or she must exercise reasonable care to avoid a collision with another vehicle in the intersection (see, Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1111 [a] [1]; see also, Redcross v State of New York, 241 AD2d 787, 790-791). Under the circumstances of this case, it was reasonable for the jury to conclude that the plaintiff’s conduct in proceeding into the intersection after the light turned green but while her view of traffic was completely obstructed was the sole proximate cause of the accident (see, Redcross v State of New York, supra).

The plaintiffs remaining contentions are without merit. Ritter, J. P., Altman, Luciano and Smith, JJ., concur.