Gold v. Surface Transit, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Gold v. Surface Transit, Inc.

23 A.D.2d 576, 256 N.Y.S.2d 788, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4886

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

DecidedFebruary 15, 1965

StatusPublished

This text of 23 A.D.2d 576 (Gold v. Surface Transit, Inc.) 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

Gold v. Surface Transit, Inc., 23 A.D.2d 576, 256 N.Y.S.2d 788, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4886 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

'In a negligence action, plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, entered February 11, 1964 after a jury trial, upon the court’s direction of a verdict in favor of the defendants. Judgment affirmed, without costs. No opinion. Beldoek, P. J., Ughetta, Christ and Brennan, JJ., concur; Benjamin, J., dissents and votes to reverse the judgment and to grant a new trial on the ground: (1) that, under all the circumstances, issues of fact were presented as to the defendants’ negligence and as to the plaintiff’s contributory negligence; and (2) that such issues should have been submitted to the jury for its determination.

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

'In a negligence action, plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, entered February 11, 1964 after a jury trial, upon the court’s direction of a verdict in favor of the defendants. Judgment affirmed, without costs. No opinion. Beldoek, P. J., Ughetta, Christ and Brennan, JJ., concur; Benjamin, J., dissents and votes to reverse the judgment and to grant a new trial on the ground: (1) that, under all the circumstances, issues of fact were presented as to the defendants’ negligence and as to the plaintiff’s contributory negligence; and (2) that such issues should have been submitted to the jury for its determination.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

23 A.D.2d 576, 256 N.Y.S.2d 788, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4886, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gold-v-surface-transit-inc-nyappdiv-1965.