Narrative Opinion Summary
Judgment affirmed unanimously without costs. The Supreme Court directed a verdict in favor of the plaintiffs on liability in a products liability case; however, the jury awarded no damages. The court correctly denied the plaintiffs’ motion to set aside the verdict, as there was a reasonable interpretation of the evidence indicating that the plaintiffs did not experience a compensable injury or economic loss. The ruling references relevant case law, specifically Nicastro v Park. The decision was made by Justices Pine, Hayes, Wisner, Pigott, Jr., and Boehm.
Legal Issues Addressed
Directed Verdict in Products Liabilitysubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court directed a verdict in favor of the plaintiffs on the issue of liability in a products liability case, indicating the defendants were found liable as a matter of law.
Reasoning: The Supreme Court directed a verdict in favor of the plaintiffs on liability in a products liability case; however, the jury awarded no damages.
Jury Verdict on Damagessubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: Despite the directed verdict on liability, the jury's decision to award no damages was upheld, suggesting that the jury found no compensable injury or economic loss.
Reasoning: The court correctly denied the plaintiffs’ motion to set aside the verdict, as there was a reasonable interpretation of the evidence indicating that the plaintiffs did not experience a compensable injury or economic loss.
Motion to Set Aside Verdictsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The plaintiffs' motion to set aside the jury's verdict of no damages was denied, reinforcing the jury's interpretation of the evidence.
Reasoning: The court correctly denied the plaintiffs’ motion to set aside the verdict, as there was a reasonable interpretation of the evidence indicating that the plaintiffs did not experience a compensable injury or economic loss.