Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County (Loren Baily-Schiffman, J.), entered May 26, 2004. The order granted plaintiff's motion pursuant to CPLR 4404 (a) for a new trial as to damages unless the parties stipulated to damages in the sum of $150,000 for past pain and suffering, and $100,000 for future pain and suffering.

Order reversed without costs and plaintiff's motion for a new trial as to damages denied.

In this action to recover damages for personal injuries, after a bifurcated trial, the jury awarded plaintiff the sum of $50,000 as damages for past pain and suffering, and did not award her any damages for future pain and suffering. The court subsequently granted plaintiff's motion pursuant to CPLR 4404 (a) for a new trial as to damages unless the parties stipulated to increase the amount of damages awarded for past pain and suffering to the sum of $150,000 and to an award of damages for future pain and suffering in the sum of $100,000. However, it is well settled that a jury verdict should not be set aside as against the weight of the evidence unless the jury could not have reached the verdict by any fair interpretation of the evidence (see Hospodar-Anikin v City of New York, 12 AD3d 405 [2004]; Nicastro v Park, 113 AD2d 129 [1985]). In the instant case, given the injuries claimed by plaintiff at trial as well as the conflicting testimony by the parties' medical witnesses, there was no basis to overturn the verdict since the record does not permit a determination that the amount awarded plaintiff deviated materially from what would be reasonable compensation (see Shurgan v Tedesco, 179 AD2d 805 [1992]; Nicastro, 113 AD2d 129, supra).

Pesce, P.J., Golia and Rios, JJ., concur.
Decision Date: February 21, 2006