Bryan v. Begelman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Bryan v. Begelman

38 A.D.2d 750, 329 N.Y.S.2d 614, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5478

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

DecidedJanuary 31, 1972

StatusPublished

This text of 38 A.D.2d 750 (Bryan v. Begelman) 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

Bryan v. Begelman, 38 A.D.2d 750, 329 N.Y.S.2d 614, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5478 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries and loss of services) etc., plaintiffs appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, entered June 26, 1970, in favor of defendants, upon a jury verdict after trial on the issue of liability only. Judgment reversed, on the law, and new trial granted, with costs to abide the event. The court has considered the questions of fact and has determined that it would not grant a new trial upon those questions. In our opinion, it was reversible error to leave it to the jury to determine, on a trial of the issue of liability only, whether the impact between the vehicles had caused plaintiff Kathleen Bryan’s injuries. It was reversible error to instruct the jury that plaintiffs’ daughter had testified only for the purpose of helping plaintiffs to recover and had given evidence with the design of securing judgments against all the defendants. Last, in view of the evidence given by the defendant drivers, it was reversible error to instruct the jury that, if they rejected the testimony of plaintiffs’ daughter, the verdict was to be in favor of defendants. Rabin, P. J., Hopkins, Martuscello, Latham and Gulotta, JJ., concur.

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

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries and loss of services) etc., plaintiffs appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, entered June 26, 1970, in favor of defendants, upon a jury verdict after trial on the issue of liability only. Judgment reversed, on the law, and new trial granted, with costs to abide the event. The court has considered the questions of fact and has determined that it would not grant a new trial upon those questions. In our opinion, it was reversible error to leave it to the jury to determine, on a trial of the issue of liability only, whether the impact between the vehicles had caused plaintiff Kathleen Bryan’s injuries. It was reversible error to instruct the jury that plaintiffs’ daughter had testified only for the purpose of helping plaintiffs to recover and had given evidence with the design of securing judgments against all the defendants. Last, in view of the evidence given by the defendant drivers, it was reversible error to instruct the jury that, if they rejected the testimony of plaintiffs’ daughter, the verdict was to be in favor of defendants. Rabin, P. J., Hopkins, Martuscello, Latham and Gulotta, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

38 A.D.2d 750, 329 N.Y.S.2d 614, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5478, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bryan-v-begelman-nyappdiv-1972.