Curran v. Higgins

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Curran v. Higgins

220 A.D. 796

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided May 15, 1927·Published

Opinion

Order [797] affirmed, with costs. Cochrane, P. J., Van Kirk and Whitmyer, JJ., concur; McCann and Davis, JJ., dissent and vote for reversal of the order and to reinstate the verdict, on the ground that there was a disputed question of fact as to the negligence of both parties, which was fairly submitted to the jury, and this is the second verdict for the defendant, and it should be given finality. (Gutman v. Weisbarth, 194 App. Div. 351, 354; Dashnau v. City of Oswego, 204 id. 189.)

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

Order [797] affirmed, with costs. Cochrane, P. J., Van Kirk and Whitmyer, JJ., concur; McCann and Davis, JJ., dissent and vote for reversal of the order and to reinstate the verdict, on the ground that there was a disputed question of fact as to the negligence of both parties, which was fairly submitted to the jury, and this is the second verdict for the defendant, and it should be given finality. (Gutman v. Weisbarth, 194 App. Div. 351, 354; Dashnau v. City of Oswego, 204 id. 189.)

Curran v. Higgins, 220 A.D. 796 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1927).

Pincite

220 A.D. 796 (Curran v. Higgins) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related