Fry v. Rochester Gas & Electric Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Fry v. Rochester Gas & Electric Corp.

259 A.D. 785, 19 N.Y.S.2d 317, 1940 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6629

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided March 6, 1940·Published

Opinion

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. Memorandum: The question before us turns almost entirely on comfijeting testimony of medical experts. There is evidence to support the jury’s finding that the serious condition on which plaintiff bases his claim was not caused by the accident for which defendants are responsible. We cannot say that the finding is against the weight of the evidence. All concur. (The judgment is for plaintiff in an automobile negligence action. The order denies plaintiff’s motion for a new trial on the ground of inadequacy of the verdict.) Present —■ Crosby, P. J., Taylor, Dowling, Harris and McCurn, JJ.

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

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. Memorandum: The question before us turns almost entirely on comfijeting testimony of medical experts. There is evidence to support the jury’s finding that the serious condition on which plaintiff bases his claim was not caused by the accident for which defendants are responsible. We cannot say that the finding is against the weight of the evidence. All concur. (The judgment is for plaintiff in an automobile negligence action. The order denies plaintiff’s motion for a new trial on the ground of inadequacy of the verdict.) Present —■ Crosby, P. J., Taylor, Dowling, Harris and McCurn, JJ.

Fry v. Rochester Gas & Electric Corp., 259 A.D. 785, 19 N.Y.S.2d 317, 1940 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6629 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1940).

Pincite

259 A.D. 785 (Fry v. Rochester Gas & Electric Corp.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.