[U] Ehrlich V. Hambrecht

After a three-week jury trial, defendants George A. Hambrecht ("Hambrecht") and Barlow Partners, Inc. ("Barlow") (collectively "Defendants") move, pursuant to CPLR 4404(a), for judgment as a matter of law on the conversion and punitive damages claims asserted by plaintiff Harold B. Ehrlich ("Ehrlich"). Defendants alternatively request a new trial on these claims, arguing that the jury's verdict was against the weight of the evidence based on improper speculative expert witness testimony and that a new trial is warranted because of allegedly inflammatory prejudicial statements made by plaintiff's counsel at trial. Defendants also move for a new trial on Ehrlich's breach of contract claim, urging that speculative and improperly admitted evidence on the tort claims confused the jury and prejudicially tainted its deliberations.