Davis v. New York City Transit Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Davis v. New York City Transit Authority

17 A.D.2d 783, 232 N.Y.S.2d 532, 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7788

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

DecidedOctober 9, 1962

StatusPublished

This text of 17 A.D.2d 783 (Davis v. New York City Transit Authority) 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. New York City Transit Authority, 17 A.D.2d 783, 232 N.Y.S.2d 532, 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7788 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1962).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, dismissing the complaint in a personal injury action, unanimously reversed, on the law and on the facts, and a new trial ordered, with costs to abide the event. At the close of the plaintiff’s ease in denying the motion to dismiss the trial court said: “If the jury believes the story, they are entitled to give him a verdict.” At the close of the entire ease, after reserving decision on the motion to dismiss but before submission to the jury and in the course of defendant’s summation, the trial court granted the motion. We hold plaintiff’s proof was sufficient to make a prima facie case and despite the persuasiveness of defendant’s evidence the case was required to be submitted to the jury. (Cf. Sagorsky v. Malyon, 307 N. Y. 584, 586; 2 A D 2d 675, revd. 3 N Y 2d 907; 4 A D 2d 1016.) Concur — Rabin, J. P., Valente, McNally, Eager and Steuer, JJ.

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

Judgment, dismissing the complaint in a personal injury action, unanimously reversed, on the law and on the facts, and a new trial ordered, with costs to abide the event. At the close of the plaintiff’s ease in denying the motion to dismiss the trial court said: “If the jury believes the story, they are entitled to give him a verdict.” At the close of the entire ease, after reserving decision on the motion to dismiss but before submission to the jury and in the course of defendant’s summation, the trial court granted the motion. We hold plaintiff’s proof was sufficient to make a prima facie case and despite the persuasiveness of defendant’s evidence the case was required to be submitted to the jury. (Cf. Sagorsky v. Malyon, 307 N. Y. 584, 586; 2 A D 2d 675, revd. 3 N Y 2d 907; 4 A D 2d 1016.) Concur — Rabin, J. P., Valente, McNally, Eager and Steuer, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

17 A.D.2d 783, 232 N.Y.S.2d 532, 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7788, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/davis-v-new-york-city-transit-authority-nyappdiv-1962.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack