Legal Opinion

Scarborough v. Federated Department Stores, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided February 14, 2012Published

1Opinion of the Court

Contrary to the plaintiffs contention, the jury verdict on the issue of damages finding that she sustained no damages for future pain and suffering and future medical expenses was based on a fair interpretation of the evidence and, thus, was not contrary to the weight of the evidence (see Lolik v Big V Supermarkets, 86 NY2d 744 [1995]; Querin v Scotti, 89 AD3d 713 [2011]; *753DeVito v Oi Ying Ho, 25 AD3d 750, 752 [2006]; Nicastro v Park, 113 AD2d 129, 134 [1985]). Mastro, A.PJ., Angiolillo, Eng and Cohen, JJ., concur.

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Nicastro v. ParkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1985
  2. Lolik v. Big v. Supermarkets, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1995
  3. DeVito v. Oi Ying HoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2006
  4. Querin v. ScottiAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011