Only published on occasion and it is 100% Spam FREE! See News Example here.

COVID-19 UPDATE: SCAHILL LAW GROUP P.C. IS OPEN AND WE ARE CONDUCTING OUR NORMAL BUSINESS. PLEASE CONTACT US WITH ANY QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS.

Victory on Appeal for Andrea Ferrucci in the Appellate Division 6-28-2017

June 28, 2017
By: Scahill Law Group PC

Congratulations to Andrea Ferrucci for a victory on Appeal in the Appellate Division Second Department on Madtes v. Scher, 151 A.D.3d 1049, 54 N.Y.S.3d 588 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017), decided on June 28, 2017. The appeal was from a jury verdict in favor of the defendants entered on January 21, 2015 in a case Tom Craven won in Queens County before Judge Greco. In affirming the jury verdict the Appellate Court stated, "Contrary to the plaintiff's contention, the verdict in favor of the defendant, finding that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102(d) as a result of the subject accident, under the significant limitation of use and permanent consequential limitation of use categories, was not contrary to the weight of the evidence. A jury verdict should not be set aside as contrary to the weight of the evidence unless the jury could not have reached its verdict on any fair interpretation of the evidence (see Samouelian v. Amroan, 127 A.D.3d 723, 724, 4 N.Y.S.3d 536; Nicastro v. Park, 113 A.D.2d 129, 495 N.Y.S.2d 184). Where, as here, conflicting expert testimony is presented, the jurors are entitled to accept one expert's opinion and reject that of another expert (see Pyong Sun Yun v. GEICO Ins. Co., 145 A.D.3d 694, 695, 43 N.Y.S.3d 117; Samouelian v. Amroan, 127 A.D.3d at 724, 4 N.Y.S.3d 536; David v. EZ Rate Rental Corp., 298 A.D.2d 353, 751 N.Y.S.2d 376)" Read the decision here.

Copyright © 2020 Scahill Law Group P.C.
Site design by Ralph Rosario

chevron-downphoneenvelopefaxheart-pulsecrossmenu linkedin facebook pinterest youtube rss twitter instagram facebook-blank rss-blank linkedin-blank pinterest youtube twitter instagram