Barth v. Drago

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Barth v. Drago

242 A.D. 631

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided June 15, 1934·Published

Opinion

Judgment reversed on the law and the facts and a new trial granted, costs to abide the event. The court erred in charging the jury that there was no question with respect to whether or not the plaintiff had a broken nose. There was a conflict of evidence on this point, and the court’s charge was an invasion of the jury's function in this respect. Lazansky, P. J., Kapper, Hagarty, Carswell and Tompkins, JJ., concur.

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

Judgment reversed on the law and the facts and a new trial granted, costs to abide the event. The court erred in charging the jury that there was no question with respect to whether or not the plaintiff had a broken nose. There was a conflict of evidence on this point, and the court’s charge was an invasion of the jury's function in this respect. Lazansky, P. J., Kapper, Hagarty, Carswell and Tompkins, JJ., concur.

Barth v. Drago, 242 A.D. 631 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1934).

Pincite

242 A.D. 631 (Barth v. Drago) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.