Dougherty v. Shapiro

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Dougherty v. Shapiro

262 A.D. 865, 28 N.Y.S.2d 320, 1941 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6308

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

DecidedJune 16, 1941

StatusPublished

This text of 262 A.D. 865 (Dougherty v. Shapiro) 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

Dougherty v. Shapiro, 262 A.D. 865, 28 N.Y.S.2d 320, 1941 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6308 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1941).

Pincite

Opinion

Action to recover damages for personal injuries suffered by the plaintiff’s intestate by reason of falling while in a yard controlled by the defendant. The issues were tried and submitted to the jury, which rendered a verdict in favor of the plaintiff upon which judgment was entered. Defendant appeals therefrom. Judgment in favor of the plaintiff reversed on the law and the facts, with costs, and the complaint dismissed on the law, with costs. The proof discloses no negligence on the part of the defendant which caused the accident through which the plaintiff’s intestate suffered the injuries complained of, and the proof further failed to establish that plaintiff’s intestate was free from contributory negligence. The defendant’s motion for a direction of a verdict should have been granted. Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Carswell, Johnston and Adel, JJ., concur.

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

Action to recover damages for personal injuries suffered by the plaintiff’s intestate by reason of falling while in a yard controlled by the defendant. The issues were tried and submitted to the jury, which rendered a verdict in favor of the plaintiff upon which judgment was entered. Defendant appeals therefrom. Judgment in favor of the plaintiff reversed on the law and the facts, with costs, and the complaint dismissed on the law, with costs. The proof discloses no negligence on the part of the defendant which caused the accident through which the plaintiff’s intestate suffered the injuries complained of, and the proof further failed to establish that plaintiff’s intestate was free from contributory negligence. The defendant’s motion for a direction of a verdict should have been granted. Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Carswell, Johnston and Adel, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

262 A.D. 865, 28 N.Y.S.2d 320, 1941 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6308, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dougherty-v-shapiro-nyappdiv-1941.