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

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

DecidedMarch 6, 1940

StatusPublished

This text of 259 A.D. 785 (Fry v. Rochester Gas & Electric Corp.) 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

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

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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

259 A.D. 785, 19 N.Y.S.2d 317, 1940 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6629, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fry-v-rochester-gas-electric-corp-nyappdiv-1940.