balancing of many factors in New York

2000Weight of the evidence analysis involves a balancing of many factors (see, Cohen v Hallmark Cards, 45 NY2d 493, 498-499 ).

1999A weight of the evidence analysis involves a balancing of many factors (see, Cohen v Hallmark Cards, 45 NY2d 493, 498-499 ).

1996This is a discretionary inquiry, involving the balancing of many factors, with the ultimate test being whether any viable evidence exists to support the verdict not whether the jury erred in weighing the evidence (see, Durkin v Peluso, 184 AD2d 940, 941 ; Nicastro v Park, 113 AD2d 129, 133 ).

1996This is a discretionary inquiry, involving the balancing of many factors, with the ultimate test being whether any viable evidence exists to support the verdict, not whether the jury erred in weighing the evidence (see, Durkin v Peluso, 184 AD2d 940, 941 ; Nicastro v Park, 113 AD2d 129, 133 ).

2010“The doctrine of forum non conveniens permits a court to dismiss an action when, although it may have jurisdiction over a claim, the court determines that ‘in the interest of substantial justice the action should be heard in another forum’ ” (National Bank & Trust Co. of N. Am. v Banco De Vizcaya, 72 NY2d 1005, 1007 [1988], cert denied 489 US 1067 [1989], quoting CPLR 327) doctrine is flexible, requiring the balancing of many factors in light of the facts and circumstances of the particular case” (National Bank & Trust Co. of N. Am. v Banco De Vizcaya, 72 NY2d at 1007 ).

2003“It is a discretionary determination which involves a balancing of many factors including, inter alia, the potential hardship to the defendant, the availability of an alternative forum, the residency of the parties and the jurisdiction in which the cause of action arose” (3H Enters. v Bennett, 276 AD2d 965 , 966 [2000], lv denied 96 NY2d 710 [2001] [citations omitted]).

2000While a contractual forum selection clause is prima facie valid (see, Bell Constructors v Evergreen Caissons, 236 AD2d 859, 860 ; British W.

2000It is a discretionary determination which involves a balancing of many factors including, inter alia, the potential hardship to the defendant, the availability of an alternative forum, the residency of the parties and the jurisdiction in which the cause of action arose (see, Islamic Republic v Pahlavi, 62 NY2d 474, 478-479 , cert denied 469 US 1108 ; Markov v Markov, 274 AD2d 870, 871 ).

2000It is a discretionary determination which involves a balancing of many factors including, inter alia, the potential hardship to the defendant, the availability of an alternative forum, the residency of the parties and the jurisdiction in which the cause of action arose (see, Islamic Republic v Pahlavi, 62 NY2d 474, 478-479 , cert denied 469 US 1108 ; Markov v Markov, 274 AD2d 870, 871 ).

2000It is a discretionary determination which involves a balancing of many factors including, inter alia, the potential hardship to the defendant, the availability of an alternative forum, the residency of the parties and the jurisdiction in which the cause of action arose (see, Islamic Republic v Pahlavi, 62 NY2d 474, 478-479 , cert denied 469 US 1108 ; Markov v Markov, 274 AD2d 870, 871 ).

1998In Yalkut v City of New York ( 162 AD2d 185, 188 ), this Court explained the guidelines for determining that a verdict is against the weight of the evidence: “In distinction to the harsher ‘no rational basis’ standard which must be overcome before concluding that a jury verdict, as a matter of law, is not supported by sufficient evidence, the question of whether a jury verdict is against the weight of the evidence involves a less rigorous standard and is essentially a discretionary and factual determination involving a balancing of many factors * * *.

1996In making this inquiry, great deference is given a jury’s determination, particularly in negligence actions where the verdict is in favor of the defendant (see, Carpenter v Albee, 192 AD2d 1004, 1004-1005 ).

1992This discretionary power must, however, be exercised with a great deal of caution, and may not be employed simply because the trial court disagrees with the verdict, as this would "unnecessarily interfere with the fact-finding function of the jury to a degree that amounts to an usurpation of the jury’s duty” (Ellis v Hoelzel, 57 AD2d 968, 969 ).

1988The doctrine is flexible, requiring the balancing of many factors in light of the facts and circumstances of the particular case (Banco Ambrosiano v Artoc Bank & Trust, 62 NY2d 65, 73 ; Silver v Great Am.

1981Apts., 43 AD2d 972 ).

1975As noted in Phillips v Phillips ( 1 AD2d 393, 395 , affd 2 NY2d 742 ), times have changed, owing not alone to the coequal status which a married woman shares with her husband, but also to the increase in the number of married women working in gainful occupations.

1975As noted in Phillips v Phillips ( 1 AD2d 393, 395 , affd 2 NY2d 742 ), times have changed, owing not alone to the coequal status which a married woman shares with her husband, but also to the increase in the number of married women working in gainful occupations.