Bradley v. City of Niagara Falls

6 A.D.2d 769, 174 N.Y.S.2d 145, 1958 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5899
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided May 16, 1958·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Judgment and order reversed on the law and facts and a new trial granted, with costs to the appellant to abide the event. Memorandum: The verdict is against the weight of the evidence. Furthermore, there is no proof of compliance with the provisions of section 50-e of the General Municipal Law. One other matter requires comment. An important diagram was received in evidence. Witnesses were permitted to testify concerning it by indicating or pointing to certain parts of it without, in any way, stating into the record to which parts they referred. This resulted in much of the testimony being vague and confusing. Trial courts should cautiously guard against such practice. Clarity, of a record is necessary to an intelligent review by an appellate court. All concur. (Appeal from a judgment of Niagara Trial Term for plaintiff in an action for property damage to plaintiff’s premises alleged to have been caused by negligent maintenance of sewer. The order denied a motion for a new trial.) Present — McCurn, P. J., Kimball, Williams, Goldman, and Halpern, JJ.

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

Bradley v. City of Niagara Falls, 6 A.D.2d 769, 174 N.Y.S.2d 145, 1958 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5899 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1958).

6 A.D.2d 769 (Bradley v. City of Niagara Falls) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Grant v. State
995 A.2d 975 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 2010)
McCoyie v. Hammond
305 A.2d 263 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 1973)
State Ex Rel. State Highway Commission v. Hill
373 S.W.2d 666 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1963)