Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.
Contrary to the defendant's contention, the plaintiff adduced sufficient evidence from which the jury could rationally conclude that he had sustained an injury which resulted in a "permanent consequential limitation of use of a body organ or member" (Insurance Law § 5102 [d]). Further, the jury's finding was not against the weight of the evidence (see generally, Nicastro v Park,
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.