Dilg v. Board of Education

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Dilg v. Board of Education

254 A.D. 689, 4 N.Y.S.2d 979, 1938 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7150

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

DecidedApril 18, 1938

StatusPublished

This text of 254 A.D. 689 (Dilg v. Board of Education) 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

Dilg v. Board of Education, 254 A.D. 689, 4 N.Y.S.2d 979, 1938 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7150 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1938).

Pincite

Opinion

The infant-plaintiff secured a verdict for $225 for personal injuries and her father a verdict for twenty-five dollars for expenses. The court set aside the verdicts and granted a new trial. Order of the County Court of Nassau county reversed on the law, with costs, motion denied, verdicts for plaintiffs reinstated, and judgment directed to be entered thereon, with costs. The court, contrary to the rule (Coleman v. Brooklyn & Queens Transit Corp., 252 App. Div. 215), assigned no definite reason for setting aside the verdicts. The record discloses that the questions of negligence and contributory negligence were those of fact and in our opinion they were properly decided by the jury. Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Davis, Johnston and Taylor, JJ., concur.

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

The infant-plaintiff secured a verdict for $225 for personal injuries and her father a verdict for twenty-five dollars for expenses. The court set aside the verdicts and granted a new trial. Order of the County Court of Nassau county reversed on the law, with costs, motion denied, verdicts for plaintiffs reinstated, and judgment directed to be entered thereon, with costs. The court, contrary to the rule (Coleman v. Brooklyn & Queens Transit Corp., 252 App. Div. 215), assigned no definite reason for setting aside the verdicts. The record discloses that the questions of negligence and contributory negligence were those of fact and in our opinion they were properly decided by the jury. Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Davis, Johnston and Taylor, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

254 A.D. 689, 4 N.Y.S.2d 979, 1938 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7150, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dilg-v-board-of-education-nyappdiv-1938.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack