Fink v. Thompson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Fink v. Thompson

274 A.D. 1067, 86 N.Y.S.2d 284, 1949 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6091

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

DecidedJanuary 24, 1949

StatusPublished

This text of 274 A.D. 1067 (Fink v. Thompson) 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

Fink v. Thompson, 274 A.D. 1067, 86 N.Y.S.2d 284, 1949 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6091 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1949).

Pincite

Opinion

Plaintiff Alice Fink sues to recover damages for personal injuries, and her father, John R. Fink, for loss of services and expenses. Alice, a passenger in an automobile operated by defendant Thompson, was injured when it ran into the left rear of an automobile operated by defendant Mertens, when the latter stopped, either partly or wholly on a highway in Ontario County, because the lights on his car went out. There was a verdict in favor of plaintiffs against both defendants. Judgment entered on the verdict unanimously affirmed, with costs. The appeal by defendant Mertens from order denying his motion to set aside the verdict, and from the denial of his motion to dismiss the complaint, is dismissed, without costs. No opinion. Present — Carswell, Acting P. J., Johnston, Adel, Wenzel and MacCrate, JJ. [See 275 App. Div. 678.]

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

Plaintiff Alice Fink sues to recover damages for personal injuries, and her father, John R. Fink, for loss of services and expenses. Alice, a passenger in an automobile operated by defendant Thompson, was injured when it ran into the left rear of an automobile operated by defendant Mertens, when the latter stopped, either partly or wholly on a highway in Ontario County, because the lights on his car went out. There was a verdict in favor of plaintiffs against both defendants. Judgment entered on the verdict unanimously affirmed, with costs. The appeal by defendant Mertens from order denying his motion to set aside the verdict, and from the denial of his motion to dismiss the complaint, is dismissed, without costs. No opinion. Present — Carswell, Acting P. J., Johnston, Adel, Wenzel and MacCrate, JJ. [See 275 App. Div. 678.]

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

274 A.D. 1067, 86 N.Y.S.2d 284, 1949 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6091, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fink-v-thompson-nyappdiv-1949.