Kraus v. Chaim Rotem

Full title: HAROLD KRAUS et al., Respondents, v. CHAIM ROTEM et al., Appellants

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

Date published: Apr 13, 1998

249 A.D.2d 371 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

670 N.Y.S.2d 367

Opinion

April 13, 1998

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Nassau County (DiNoto, J.).

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

Due to the defendants' failure to register an objection to the jury's verdict on the ground of inconsistency prior to the dismissal of the jury, at which time corrective measures could have been taken, their contention that the verdict was inconsistent is unpreserved for appellate review ( see, Barry v. Manglass, 55 N.Y.2d 803). In any event, the verdict "was not necessarily inconsistent, in light of the law as it was defined to the jury by the trial court" ( Barone v. City of Mount Vernon, 170 A.D.2d 557, 558).

The damages awarded did not deviate materially from what would be reasonable compensation ( see, CPLR 5501 [c]).

Altman, J.P., Krausman, Florio and Luciano, JJ., concur.