From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Tornello v. Gemini Enterprises

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 18, 2002
299 A.D.2d 477 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)

Opinion

2001-06290

Argued October 24, 2002.

November 18, 2002.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant Loretta Celardo appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Davis, J.), entered June 22, 2001, as, upon a jury verdict on the issue of liability finding the defendants jointly and severally liable for the happening of the accident, and finding that the plaintiff sustained damages in the sum of $300,000 for past pain and suffering and $200,000 for future pain and suffering, is in favor of the plaintiff and against her.

Rivkin Radler, LLP, Uniondale, N.Y. (Evan H. Krinick, Cheryl F. Korman, and Harris J. Zakarin of counsel), for appellant.

Cerussi Spring, P.C., White Plains, N.Y. (Evy L. Kazansky and Richard Ashnault of counsel), for defendant-respondent Gemini Enterprises, Inc., d/b/a Oyster Bay Nissan.

Before: NANCY E. SMITH, J.P., GLORIA GOLDSTEIN, LEO F. McGINITY, WILLIAM F. MASTRO, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

A jury verdict is not to 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 Darmetta v. Ginsburg, 256 A.D.2d 498; Nicastro v. Park, 113 A.D.2d 129). Determinations regarding the credibility of witnesses are for the fact-finders, who had an opportunity to see and hear the witnesses, and great deference is accorded to their findings (see Darmetta v. Ginsbury, supra). In this case, the determination of the jury not to credit the testimony of the interested witnesses and its determination that title to the subject vehicle was not transferred before the accident which resulted in the plaintiff's injuries was based on a fair interpretation of the credible evidence.

The award of damages did not materially deviate from what would be reasonable compensation (see CPLR 5501[c]; Walsh v. Kings Plaza Replacement Serv., 239 A.D.2d 408; Gaetan v. New York City Tr. Auth., 213 A.D.2d 510).

SMITH, J.P., GOLDSTEIN, McGINITY and MASTRO, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Tornello v. Gemini Enterprises

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 18, 2002
299 A.D.2d 477 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
Case details for

Tornello v. Gemini Enterprises

Case Details

Full title:DIANE SARA TORNELLO, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. GEMINI ENTERPRISES, INC.…

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

Date published: Nov 18, 2002

Citations

299 A.D.2d 477 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
749 N.Y.S.2d 745

Citing Cases

Vardaros v. Zapas

It is well-recognized that issues of credibility are primarily to be determined by the trier of fact who had…

Gaspard v. Aronoff

Plaintiff argues that the jury was free to reject Dr. Aronoff's testimony and to credit plaintiff's testimony…