Kristina A. MEADOWS, Appellant, v. Travis J. RUDISILL Appellee, 160 F. App'x 546

PER CURIAM. In this diversity case, plaintiff Kristina A. Meadows appeals, asserting that the jury verdict for defendant is not supported by sufficient evidence and that the district court should have granted judgment as a matter of law, or in the alternative, a new trial. As to the sufficiency of a verdict based on Missouri law, this court reverses only in the complete absence of probative facts to support it. See Joel Bianco Kawasaki Plus v. Meramec Valley Bank, 81 S.W.3d 528, 537 (Mo. banc 2002); National American Insurance Co. v.

Hogan, 173 F.3d 1097, 1103 (8th Cir.l999)(review of a jury verdict in a diversity case, applies the same standard as used by the state where the district court sits). As to the after-trial rulings, when the verdict is attacked as against the weight of the evidence, this court gives great deference to the district court’s rulings. See Shaffer v. Wilkes, 65 F.3d 115, 118 (8th Cir.1995). Having carefully reviewed the record and applicable law in this two-vehicle, rear-end collision case, this court concludes that the evidence in support of the verdict is not insufficient, and no error of law appears. AFFIRMED.

See 8th Cir. R. 47B. . The Honorable Scott O. Wright, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri.