Burrows v. Goldberg

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Burrows v. Goldberg

246 A.D. 822

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

DecidedJanuary 15, 1936

StatusPublished

This text of 246 A.D. 822 (Burrows v. Goldberg) 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

Burrows v. Goldberg, 246 A.D. 822 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1936).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for alleged malpractice of a physician the jury, after nearly four hours of deliberation, found a verdict for the defendant. The appeal is based solely on the ground that the trial court in its charge made remarks on the evidence prejudicial to the plaintiff. Judgment unanimously affirmed, with costs. No opinion. Present — Young, Carswell, Davis, Adel and Taylor, JJ.

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

In an action to recover damages for alleged malpractice of a physician the jury, after nearly four hours of deliberation, found a verdict for the defendant. The appeal is based solely on the ground that the trial court in its charge made remarks on the evidence prejudicial to the plaintiff. Judgment unanimously affirmed, with costs. No opinion. Present — Young, Carswell, Davis, Adel and Taylor, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

246 A.D. 822, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/burrows-v-goldberg-nyappdiv-1936.