Bertlaney v. State

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Bertlaney v. State

23 A.D.2d 937, 259 N.Y.S.2d 1022, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4096

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

DecidedMay 24, 1965

DocketClaim No. 38326

StatusPublished

This text of 23 A.D.2d 937 (Bertlaney v. State) 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

Bertlaney v. State, 23 A.D.2d 937, 259 N.Y.S.2d 1022, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4096 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

Aulisi, J.

Appeal from a judgment of the Court of Claims which awarded damages for assault, false arrest and imprisonment. There seems to us no serious or substantial dispute as to the commission of the torts alleged, which occurred as the result of a State trooper’s completely unwarranted assumption that at the time of certain prior incidents involving claimant’s companions, claimant had been a passenger in the car which the trooper later stopped and from which he then removed claimant. The proof of damage was not contradicted and the award was not excessive. We find nothing in the exhibits excluded by the trial court that would suggest a different decision of the ease. Judgment affirmed, with costs. Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Taylor and Hamm, JJ., concur.

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

Aulisi, J.

Appeal from a judgment of the Court of Claims which awarded damages for assault, false arrest and imprisonment. There seems to us no serious or substantial dispute as to the commission of the torts alleged, which occurred as the result of a State trooper’s completely unwarranted assumption that at the time of certain prior incidents involving claimant’s companions, claimant had been a passenger in the car which the trooper later stopped and from which he then removed claimant. The proof of damage was not contradicted and the award was not excessive. We find nothing in the exhibits excluded by the trial court that would suggest a different decision of the ease. Judgment affirmed, with costs. Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Taylor and Hamm, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

23 A.D.2d 937, 259 N.Y.S.2d 1022, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4096, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bertlaney-v-state-nyappdiv-1965.