Campbell v. Muncie

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Campbell v. Muncie

247 A.D. 758

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

DecidedFebruary 15, 1936

StatusPublished

This text of 247 A.D. 758 (Campbell v. Muncie) 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

Campbell v. Muncie, 247 A.D. 758 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1936).

Pincite

Opinion

The plaintiff moved at Special Term for an order framing issues for a trial by a jury involving a release executed by the plaintiff. (Campbell v. Muncie, No. 2, 246 App. Div. 633.) Two questions were framed, but they neither clearly and succinctly stated the issues to be submitted, nor framed the issues as they are stated in the affidavits. (Barker v. Conley, 267 N. Y. 43.) The order is modified by framing in lieu of the two questions in the order, a single question as follows: “ Did the plaintiff sign the release with the knowledge and purpose that he was thereby releasing the defendants from any claim that he might have against them for alienation of the affections of his wife? ” The clerk at Trial Term, Part I, of the Supreme Court, Kings county, will place the issues on the calendar for trial as directed by the justice presiding at that term. As so modified the order is affirmed, without costs. Lazansky, P. J., Young, Hagarty, Carswell and Davis, JJ., concur.

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

The plaintiff moved at Special Term for an order framing issues for a trial by a jury involving a release executed by the plaintiff. (Campbell v. Muncie, No. 2, 246 App. Div. 633.) Two questions were framed, but they neither clearly and succinctly stated the issues to be submitted, nor framed the issues as they are stated in the affidavits. (Barker v. Conley, 267 N. Y. 43.) The order is modified by framing in lieu of the two questions in the order, a single question as follows: “ Did the plaintiff sign the release with the knowledge and purpose that he was thereby releasing the defendants from any claim that he might have against them for alienation of the affections of his wife? ” The clerk at Trial Term, Part I, of the Supreme Court, Kings county, will place the issues on the calendar for trial as directed by the justice presiding at that term. As so modified the order is affirmed, without costs. Lazansky, P. J., Young, Hagarty, Carswell and Davis, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

247 A.D. 758, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/campbell-v-muncie-nyappdiv-1936.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack