Davis v. Lorenzo's, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Davis v. Lorenzo's, Inc.

258 A.D. 933, 16 N.Y.S.2d 624, 1939 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7629

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

DecidedDecember 27, 1939

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 258 A.D. 933 (Davis v. Lorenzo's, Inc.) 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

Davis v. Lorenzo's, Inc., 258 A.D. 933, 16 N.Y.S.2d 624, 1939 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7629 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1939).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. Memorandum: There was sufficient evidence to sustain the verdict of the jury based upon findings that the plant installed by plaintiff in defendant’s building conformed in all respects to the terms of the contract made between the parties and that the repairs thereon became necessary by reason of the manner in which the defendant used and operated the plant. The affidavits submitted on defendant’s motion to set aside the verdict of the jury upon the ground that one of its members had made an outside investigation of the fact shows that there was not misconduct harmful to defendant or that was in any way improper on the part of any juror. Statements made outside of court by a juror following the trial, as well as affidavits made by a juror after the trial, may not be used to impeach the verdict of the jury. (People v. Sprague, 217 N. Y. 373; Gregory v. Bijou Theatre Co., 138 App. Div. 590; Payne v. Burke, 236 id. 527.) All concur. (The judgment is for plaintiff in an action for balance due for labor and material furnished. The order denies a motion for a new trial on the ground of irregularity and misconduct of the jury.) Present — Sears, P. J., Crosby, Cunningham, Taylor and Dowling, JJ.

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

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. Memorandum: There was sufficient evidence to sustain the verdict of the jury based upon findings that the plant installed by plaintiff in defendant’s building conformed in all respects to the terms of the contract made between the parties and that the repairs thereon became necessary by reason of the manner in which the defendant used and operated the plant. The affidavits submitted on defendant’s motion to set aside the verdict of the jury upon the ground that one of its members had made an outside investigation of the fact shows that there was not misconduct harmful to defendant or that was in any way improper on the part of any juror. Statements made outside of court by a juror following the trial, as well as affidavits made by a juror after the trial, may not be used to impeach the verdict of the jury. (People v. Sprague, 217 N. Y. 373; Gregory v. Bijou Theatre Co., 138 App. Div. 590; Payne v. Burke, 236 id. 527.) All concur. (The judgment is for plaintiff in an action for balance due for labor and material furnished. The order denies a motion for a new trial on the ground of irregularity and misconduct of the jury.) Present — Sears, P. J., Crosby, Cunningham, Taylor and Dowling, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

258 A.D. 933, 16 N.Y.S.2d 624, 1939 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7629, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/davis-v-lorenzos-inc-nyappdiv-1939.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack