De Vito v. Knettel

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

De Vito v. Knettel

32 Misc. 2d 656, 218 N.Y.S.2d 735, 1961 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2857

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedMay 23, 1961

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 32 Misc. 2d 656 (De Vito v. Knettel) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

De Vito v. Knettel, 32 Misc. 2d 656, 218 N.Y.S.2d 735, 1961 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2857 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1961).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The purported verdict was recorded as follows: “ The jury believes there was negligence on both sides but the greater negligence was contributed by Mr. Knettel, therefore awarding Mr. De Vito the sum of $750.” The foregoing does not constitute a general verdict within the meaning of section 458 of the Civil Practice Act and the court should have directed the jury to return for further deliberation and bring in a proper verdict. (Conrey v. Metropolitan St. Ry. Co., 73 App. Div. 518; Swift v. Fairyland Park, 2 Misc 2d 155; Savko v. Brooklyn & Queens Tr. Corp., 166 Misc. 84, affd. App. Term, 2d Dept., Jan. 15, 1938; Klepper v. Seymour House Corp., 246 N. Y. 85, 95; Warner v. New York Cent. R. R. Co., 52 N. Y. 437; Bourcier v. Peryor, 267 App. Div. 932.)

The judgment and order should be unanimously reversed, without costs, and motion for a new trial granted.

Concur — Di Giovanna, Benjamín and Daly, J j.

Judgment and order reversed, etc.

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

Per Curiam.

The purported verdict was recorded as follows: “ The jury believes there was negligence on both sides but the greater negligence was contributed by Mr. Knettel, therefore awarding Mr. De Vito the sum of $750.” The foregoing does not constitute a general verdict within the meaning of section 458 of the Civil Practice Act and the court should have directed the jury to return for further deliberation and bring in a proper verdict. (Conrey v. Metropolitan St. Ry. Co., 73 App. Div. 518; Swift v. Fairyland Park, 2 Misc 2d 155; Savko v. Brooklyn & Queens Tr. Corp., 166 Misc. 84, affd. App. Term, 2d Dept., Jan. 15, 1938; Klepper v. Seymour House Corp., 246 N. Y. 85, 95; Warner v. New York Cent. R. R. Co., 52 N. Y. 437; Bourcier v. Peryor, 267 App. Div. 932.)

The judgment and order should be unanimously reversed, without costs, and motion for a new trial granted.

Concur — Di Giovanna, Benjamín and Daly, J j.

Judgment and order reversed, etc.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

32 Misc. 2d 656, 218 N.Y.S.2d 735, 1961 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2857, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/de-vito-v-knettel-nyappterm-1961.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack