Battista v. Bogan

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Battista v. Bogan

16 A.D.2d 970, 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8942

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

DecidedJune 25, 1962

StatusPublished

This text of 16 A.D.2d 970 (Battista v. Bogan) 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

Battista v. Bogan, 16 A.D.2d 970, 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8942 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1962).

Pincite

Opinion

In a negligence action to recover damages for injuries to person and property, arising out of a collision between a truck operated by plaintiff Battista and owned by the corporate plaintiff, and the automobile owned and operated by the defendant Bogan who lost control of the operation of his automobile by reason of an excavation in the highway made by defendant [971]*971Consolidated Edison Company, the defendant Bogan appeals from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, entered November 3,1961 after a jury trial, as is in the plaintiffs’ favor against him. Judgment, insofar as appealed from, affirmed, with costs. No opinion. Kleinfeld, Christ and Rabin, JJ., concur; Ughetta, Acting P. J., and Hill, J., dissent and vote to reverse the judgment insofar as appealed from, and to dismiss the complaint on the ground that the evidence adduced was insufficient as a matter of law to establish that the defendant Bogan was negligent in the operation of his automobile (cf. Ruback v. McCleary, Wallin & Crouse, 220 N. Y. 188, 195; Digelormo v. Weil, 260 N. Y. 192, 200).

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

In a negligence action to recover damages for injuries to person and property, arising out of a collision between a truck operated by plaintiff Battista and owned by the corporate plaintiff, and the automobile owned and operated by the defendant Bogan who lost control of the operation of his automobile by reason of an excavation in the highway made by defendant [971]*971Consolidated Edison Company, the defendant Bogan appeals from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, entered November 3,1961 after a jury trial, as is in the plaintiffs’ favor against him. Judgment, insofar as appealed from, affirmed, with costs. No opinion. Kleinfeld, Christ and Rabin, JJ., concur; Ughetta, Acting P. J., and Hill, J., dissent and vote to reverse the judgment insofar as appealed from, and to dismiss the complaint on the ground that the evidence adduced was insufficient as a matter of law to establish that the defendant Bogan was negligent in the operation of his automobile (cf. Ruback v. McCleary, Wallin & Crouse, 220 N. Y. 188, 195; Digelormo v. Weil, 260 N. Y. 192, 200).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

16 A.D.2d 970, 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8942, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/battista-v-bogan-nyappdiv-1962.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack