Bankers Trust Co. v. R & Z Television of New York, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Bankers Trust Co. v. R & Z Television of New York, Inc.

4 A.D.2d 690, 164 N.Y.S.2d 488, 1957 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5084

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedJune 17, 1957

StatusPublished

This text of 4 A.D.2d 690 (Bankers Trust Co. v. R & Z Television of New York, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bankers Trust Co. v. R & Z Television of New York, Inc., 4 A.D.2d 690, 164 N.Y.S.2d 488, 1957 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5084 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1957).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for wrongful death and for conscious pain and suffering, the appeal is from a judgment in favor of respondents, entered after trial before the court without a jury. Judgment unanimously affirmed, with costs. Upon the record presented, the trial court was justified in finding that the accident was caused by appellants’ negligence and that they failed to prove contributory negligence on the part of the testator. While we are of the opinion that appellants’ claim with respect to proof of damage is not without merit, we find in this record sufficient evidence to establish the testator’s earning capacity. On the basis of such earning capacity, the award of damages was not excessive. Present—Nolan, P. J., Wenzel, Beldock, Hallinan and Kleinfeld, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

In an action to recover damages for wrongful death and for conscious pain and suffering, the appeal is from a judgment in favor of respondents, entered after trial before the court without a jury. Judgment unanimously affirmed, with costs. Upon the record presented, the trial court was justified in finding that the accident was caused by appellants’ negligence and that they failed to prove contributory negligence on the part of the testator. While we are of the opinion that appellants’ claim with respect to proof of damage is not without merit, we find in this record sufficient evidence to establish the testator’s earning capacity. On the basis of such earning capacity, the award of damages was not excessive. Present—Nolan, P. J., Wenzel, Beldock, Hallinan and Kleinfeld, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

4 A.D.2d 690, 164 N.Y.S.2d 488, 1957 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5084, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bankers-trust-co-v-r-z-television-of-new-york-inc-nyappdiv-1957.