Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Cayuga County (Peter E. Corning, A.J.), entered November 29, 2004 in a medical malpractice action. The judgment, upon a jury verdict, dismissed the complaint.
It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed without costs.
Memorandum: Plaintiffs appeal from a judgment, entered upon a jury verdict of no cause of action, dismissing the complaint in this medical malpractice action. Plaintiffs requested a charge on foreseeability and proximate cause and thus waived their contention that Supreme Court erred in so charging the jury (see Schmidt v Buffalo Gen. Hosp., 278 AD2d 827, 828 [2000], lv denied 96 NY2d 710 [2001]; Sandoval v Stanley Works & Tools Div., 261 AD2d 885 [1999]; see generally Matter of Humberstone v Wheaton, 21 AD3d 1416, 1417 [2005]). In addition, plaintiffs failed to object to the charge as given, and thus their additional challenges to the court’s charge are unpreserved for our review (see CPLR 4110-b; Balsz v A & T Bus Co., 252 AD2d 458, 459 [1998]).
We reject the further contention of plaintiffs that the court erred in denying their motion to set aside the verdict as against the weight of the evidence. “[T]he preponderance of the evidence in favor of plaintiff[s] is not so great that the verdict could not have been reached upon any fair interpretation of the evidence, nor is the verdict [finding that defendant physician was not negligent] palpably wrong or irrational” (Kettles v City of Rochester, 21 AD3d 1424, 1425 [2005]; see Lolik v Big V Supermarkets, 86 NY2d 744, 746 [1995]; McClain v Lockport Mem. Hosp., 236 AD2d 864, 865 [1997], lv denied 89 NY2d 817 [1997]).