DeLaval Sales & Service, Inc. v. Valk

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

DeLaval Sales & Service, Inc. v. Valk

258 A.D. 968, 16 N.Y.S.2d 889, 1940 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8476

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

DecidedJanuary 8, 1940

StatusPublished

This text of 258 A.D. 968 (DeLaval Sales & Service, Inc. v. Valk) 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

DeLaval Sales & Service, Inc. v. Valk, 258 A.D. 968, 16 N.Y.S.2d 889, 1940 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8476 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1940).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action for damages for injury to its motor truck, caused by a collision between the truck and an automobile owned by one of the defendants and driven by the other, plaintiff appeals from a judgment, entered on the verdict of a jury, dismissing plaintiff’s complaint. Judgment of the County Court of Dutchess county reversed on the law and the facts and a new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide the event. In so far as the verdict is in favor of the defendants and fails to award damages to the plaintiff upon its claim, it is against the weight of the credible evidence. The learned trial judge’s charge to-the jury, relating to an act of God, was erroneous. Although the condition of the road was due to such an act in the popular sense, it was not due to that cause in the legal sense. (Cormack v. New York, N. H. & H. R. R. Co., 196 N. Y. 442, 447.) Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Johnston, Adel and Taylor, JJ., concur.

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

In an action for damages for injury to its motor truck, caused by a collision between the truck and an automobile owned by one of the defendants and driven by the other, plaintiff appeals from a judgment, entered on the verdict of a jury, dismissing plaintiff’s complaint. Judgment of the County Court of Dutchess county reversed on the law and the facts and a new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide the event. In so far as the verdict is in favor of the defendants and fails to award damages to the plaintiff upon its claim, it is against the weight of the credible evidence. The learned trial judge’s charge to-the jury, relating to an act of God, was erroneous. Although the condition of the road was due to such an act in the popular sense, it was not due to that cause in the legal sense. (Cormack v. New York, N. H. & H. R. R. Co., 196 N. Y. 442, 447.) Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Johnston, Adel and Taylor, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

258 A.D. 968, 16 N.Y.S.2d 889, 1940 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8476, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/delaval-sales-service-inc-v-valk-nyappdiv-1940.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack