Bariteau v. Jerome

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Bariteau v. Jerome

53 A.D.2d 956, 386 N.Y.S.2d 824, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15754

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

DecidedJuly 15, 1976

StatusPublished

This text of 53 A.D.2d 956 (Bariteau v. Jerome) 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

Bariteau v. Jerome, 53 A.D.2d 956, 386 N.Y.S.2d 824, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15754 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

Cross appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court in favor of plaintiff, entered June 3, 1975 in Rensselaer County,' upon a verdict rendered at a Trial Term and appeals from orders of the same court entered June 5, 1975 and June 23, 1975 respectively' which denied separate motions to set aside the verdict. Presented herein are appeals from a jury verdict and the orders entered therein in a negligence action. The jury returned a verdict of $6,325 for the plaintiff and apportioned the liability as 50% to the defendant Jerome, and 50% to the defendants Tricarick. Involved only were questions of fact. We find no reason tp disturb the jury’s determination of the issues, nor the court’s denial of the motions. Judgment and orders affirmed, without costs. Greenblott, J. P., Sweeney, Main, Herlihy and Reynolds, JJ., concur.

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

Cross appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court in favor of plaintiff, entered June 3, 1975 in Rensselaer County,' upon a verdict rendered at a Trial Term and appeals from orders of the same court entered June 5, 1975 and June 23, 1975 respectively' which denied separate motions to set aside the verdict. Presented herein are appeals from a jury verdict and the orders entered therein in a negligence action. The jury returned a verdict of $6,325 for the plaintiff and apportioned the liability as 50% to the defendant Jerome, and 50% to the defendants Tricarick. Involved only were questions of fact. We find no reason tp disturb the jury’s determination of the issues, nor the court’s denial of the motions. Judgment and orders affirmed, without costs. Greenblott, J. P., Sweeney, Main, Herlihy and Reynolds, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

53 A.D.2d 956, 386 N.Y.S.2d 824, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15754, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bariteau-v-jerome-nyappdiv-1976.