De Pinto v. O'Donnell Transportation Co.

New York Court of Appeals

De Pinto v. O'Donnell Transportation Co.

55 N.E.2d 855, 293 N.Y. 32, 1944 N.Y. LEXIS 1343

CourtNew York Court of Appeals

DecidedMay 25, 1944

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 55 N.E.2d 855 (De Pinto v. O'Donnell Transportation Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

De Pinto v. O'Donnell Transportation Co., 55 N.E.2d 855, 293 N.Y. 32, 1944 N.Y. LEXIS 1343 (N.Y. 1944).

Pincite

Opinion

*36 Per Curiam.

The evidence amply supports the finding by the jury that there was negligence on the part of the defendant-appellant and freedom from contributory negligence on the part of the deceased. Upon consideration of the Federal statutes (U. S. Rev. Stat., §§ 4283, 4284, 4285; U. S. Code, tit. 46, §§ 183, 184 and 185, as amd. by Act of June 5, 1936, ch. 521 [49 U. S. Stat. 1479 et seq.']), we agree with the interpretation in The Chickie (141 F. 2d 80), and, accordingly, under section 606 of the Civil Practice Act (as amd. by L. 1942, ch. 297), the judgment is reversed and the case is remitted to the Appellate Division, without costs, for determination upon the questions of fact, including discretion, raised in that court by the defendant-appellant’s motion to amend the answer.

The judgment of the Appellate Division should be reversed, without costs, and the case remitted to the Appellate Division for determination upon the questions of fact, including discretion, raised in that court by the defendant-appellant’s motion to amend the answer.

Lehman, Ch. J., Loughban, Rippey, Lewis, Conway, Desmond and Thacheb, JJ., concur.

Judgment accordingly.

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

*36 Per Curiam.

The evidence amply supports the finding by the jury that there was negligence on the part of the defendant-appellant and freedom from contributory negligence on the part of the deceased. Upon consideration of the Federal statutes (U. S. Rev. Stat., §§ 4283, 4284, 4285; U. S. Code, tit. 46, §§ 183, 184 and 185, as amd. by Act of June 5, 1936, ch. 521 [49 U. S. Stat. 1479 et seq.']), we agree with the interpretation in The Chickie (141 F. 2d 80), and, accordingly, under section 606 of the Civil Practice Act (as amd. by L. 1942, ch. 297), the judgment is reversed and the case is remitted to the Appellate Division, without costs, for determination upon the questions of fact, including discretion, raised in that court by the defendant-appellant’s motion to amend the answer.

The judgment of the Appellate Division should be reversed, without costs, and the case remitted to the Appellate Division for determination upon the questions of fact, including discretion, raised in that court by the defendant-appellant’s motion to amend the answer.

Lehman, Ch. J., Loughban, Rippey, Lewis, Conway, Desmond and Thacheb, JJ., concur.

Judgment accordingly.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

55 N.E.2d 855, 293 N.Y. 32, 1944 N.Y. LEXIS 1343, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/de-pinto-v-odonnell-transportation-co-ny-1944.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack