From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Farahmandpour v. Singer

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 2, 1998
247 A.D.2d 358 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

Opinion

February 2, 1998

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Lonschein, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

A jury verdict should not be set aside as against the weight of the evidence unless the jury could not have reached its verdict on any fair interpretation of the evidence ( see, Nicastro v. Park, 113 A.D.2d 129). Determinations as to the credibility of the witnesses are for the fact-finder, who had the opportunity to see and hear the witnesses ( See, Frangello v. Namm, 157 A.D.2d 649; Birnbaum v. All-State Vehicle, 139 A.D.2d 553; Sheps v. Hall Co., 112 A.D.2d 281). A review of the evidence in this case demonstrates that a fair basis existed for the verdict in the defendant's favor.

We find unpersuasive the plaintiff's contention that he was deprived of a fair trial by the trial court's conduct. Contrary to the plaintiff's contention, the court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in limiting cross-examination of the defendant with respect to alleged inconsistent statements ( see, People v. Duncan, 46 N.Y.2d 74, cert denied 442 U.S. 910).

The defendant's remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review ( see, CPLR 5501) or do not warrant reversal.

Mangano, P.J., Joy, Altman and Luciano, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Farahmandpour v. Singer

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 2, 1998
247 A.D.2d 358 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
Case details for

Farahmandpour v. Singer

Case Details

Full title:MIRZA FARAHMANDPOUR, Appellant, v. SAMUEL S. SINGER, Respondent

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Feb 2, 1998

Citations

247 A.D.2d 358 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
667 N.Y.S.2d 940

Citing Cases

Georgescu v. City of N.Y.

efective sewer grate which was not depicted on the subject map. “The trial court has broad discretion in…