Haynes v Lemus

Holding The Appellate Division affirmed the judgment dismissing the complaint, finding that the jury’s verdict that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury under Insurance Law § 5102(d) was supported by a fair interpretation of the evidence. The court held that the verdict was not contrary to the weight of the evidence, particularly given the presence of conflicting expert testimony.

The court’s words

A jury verdict should not be set aside as contrary to the weight of the evidence unless the jury could not have reached the verdict by any fair interpretation of the evidence

2026 NY Slip Op 06420, at the official text

the jury's finding that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury under the permanent consequential limitation of use and significant limitation of use categories of Insurance Law § 5102(d) as a result of the accident was supported by a fair interpretation of the evidence

2026 NY Slip Op 06420, at the official text