In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiffs appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Mason, J.), entered October 12, 2001, which, upon a jury verdict, is in favor of the defendants and against them, dismissing the complaint.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.
Whether expert testimony is admissible on a particular matter is generally a mixed question of law and fact addressed to the sound discretion of the trial court (see Selkowitz v County of Nassau,
The trial court properly declined the plaintiffs’ request to charge the jury that they could recover under theories of aggravation of a preexisting condition or precipitation or activa
Contrary to the plaintiffs’ contention, the trial court properly denied their motion for a mistrial. The trial court did not display any bias or prejudice against the plaintiffs’ counsel (see Pallotta v West Bend Co.,
The plaintiffs’ remaining contentions are without merit. Santucci, J.P., Altman, Florio and S. Miller, JJ., concur.
