Opinion
March 9, 1998
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Rudolph, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.
"It is well settled that the amount of damages to be awarded for personal injuries is primarily a question of fact for the jury" ( Schare v. Welsbach Elec. Corp., 138 A.D.2d 477, 478; see, Jandt v. Abele, 116 A.D.2d 699). Its verdict should not be set aside unless it could not have been reached by any fair interpretation of the evidence adduced at trial ( see, Policastro v. Savarese, 171 A.D.2d 849). Only where the award "deviates materially from what would be reasonable compensation" can a new trial be granted (CPLR 5501 [c]).
The Supreme Court's additur to the verdict, to which the defendants stipulated, adequately compensated the plaintiff for his past pain and suffering. Moreover, the jury's determination that the plaintiff was not entitled to recover damages for future pain and suffering was based upon a fair interpretation of the evidence ( see, Giladov v. Kurzweil, 220 A.D.2d 481).
Santucci, J. P., Joy, Friedmann and McGinity, JJ., concur.