10.3 B. Weight of the Evidence

• Library: NY Post-Trial Practice & Procedures 2010

An appellate court’s review of a motion to set aside the verdict based on the weight of the evidence rests on an abuse-of-discretion standard.⁵⁶⁴ Whether a jury verdict is against the weight of the evidence is a factual determination, which is to be distinguished from the question of whether a jury verdict, as a matter of law, is supported by sufficient evidence.⁵⁶⁵ The standard for making the against-the-weight-of-the-evidence factual determination, and reviewing it on appeal, is whether “ ‘the evidence so preponderate[s] in favor of the [plaintiff] that [the verdict] could not have been reached on any fair interpretation of the evidence.’ ”⁵⁶⁶

As Justice Lazer observed in Nicastro v. Park,⁵⁶⁷

The criteria for setting aside a jury verdict as against the weight of the evidence are necessarily less stringent, for such a determination results only in a new trial and does not deprive the parties of their right to ultimately have all disputed issues of fact resolved by a jury.

The question is not one of law but, rather, requires a discretionary balancing of many factors.⁵⁶⁸ Justice Lazer warned that trial courts must exercise their discretionary power with considerable caution, for absent indications that substantial justice has not been done, a successful litigant is entitled to the benefits of a favorable jury verdict.⁵⁶⁹ Resolution of a motion to set aside a verdict as against the weight of the evidence involves an application of professional judgment gleaned from the judge’s...