HOMMEL v. GARELICK MANUFACTURING CO (1998)

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.

Harold HOMMEL and Betty Hommel, Appellants, v. GARELICK MANUFACTURING CO., Respondent.

Decided: October 02, 1998

Before: PINE, J.P., and HAYES, WISNER, PIGOTT and BOEHM, JJ.

Bucci & Lockwood (Linda Cook, for counsel), Baldwinsville, for Appellants. Hancock & Eastbrook, L.L.P. by Janet Callahan, Syracuse, for Respondent.

After Supreme Court directed a verdict in plaintiffs' favor on the issue of liability at the trial of this products liability action, the jury returned a verdict awarding plaintiffs no damages. The court properly denied plaintiffs' motion to set aside the verdict as contrary to the weight of the evidence (see, CPLR 4404[a] ). There is a fair interpretation of the evidence that plaintiffs did not sustain an identifiable compensable injury or any economic loss (see generally, Nicastro v. Park, 113 A.D.2d 129, 134-135, 495 N.Y.S.2d 184).

Judgment unanimously affirmed without costs.

MEMORANDUM:

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network