Garfinkel v. Wilen

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Garfinkel v. Wilen

24 A.D.2d 863, 264 N.Y.S.2d 383, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3084

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

DecidedNovember 1, 1965

StatusPublished

This text of 24 A.D.2d 863 (Garfinkel v. Wilen) 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

Garfinkel v. Wilen, 24 A.D.2d 863, 264 N.Y.S.2d 383, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3084 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries sustained by a wife, and for medical expenses and loss of services by her husband, plaintiffs appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, entered January 20, 1964 on a decision which granted defendant’s motion to set aside a jury verdict in plaintiffs’ favor and directed a verdict for defendant. Judgment affirmed, without costs. In our opinion, the evidence adduced by plaintiffs was insufficient as a matter of law to establish that defendant deviated from the accepted standard of diagnosis and treatment, and that the damages claimed to have beeen sustained were attributable to any act or failure to act on the defendant’s part. Beldock, P. J., Ug'hetta, Christ, Brennan and Hopkins, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries sustained by a wife, and for medical expenses and loss of services by her husband, plaintiffs appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, entered January 20, 1964 on a decision which granted defendant’s motion to set aside a jury verdict in plaintiffs’ favor and directed a verdict for defendant. Judgment affirmed, without costs. In our opinion, the evidence adduced by plaintiffs was insufficient as a matter of law to establish that defendant deviated from the accepted standard of diagnosis and treatment, and that the damages claimed to have beeen sustained were attributable to any act or failure to act on the defendant’s part. Beldock, P. J., Ug'hetta, Christ, Brennan and Hopkins, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

24 A.D.2d 863, 264 N.Y.S.2d 383, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3084, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/garfinkel-v-wilen-nyappdiv-1965.