Gramaglia v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Gramaglia v. City of New York

257 A.D. 990, 13 N.Y.S.2d 638, 1939 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8837

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

DecidedJune 27, 1939

StatusPublished

This text of 257 A.D. 990 (Gramaglia v. City of New York) 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

Gramaglia v. City of New York, 257 A.D. 990, 13 N.Y.S.2d 638, 1939 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8837 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1939).

Pincite

Opinion

Action to recover damages for personal injuries. The plaintiff was injured while in the act of boarding defendant’s subway train. Judgment reversed on the facts and a new trial granted, costs to abide the event, on the ground that the verdict is against the weight of the evidence on the theory of the facts upon which the case was submitted to the jury. The only evidence which warranted a submission to the jury was that relating to failure reasonably to control passengers emerging from the cars, if it be found that in the exercise of ordinary care there should have been such control because of pushing and shoving each morning, if the latter evidence be credited. No submission was pointedly made to the jury on this theory. Lazansky, P. J., Carswell, Adel and Taylor, JJ., concur; Hagarty, J., concurs as to the reversal, but dissents as to granting a new trial and votes to dismiss the complaint, with the following memorandum: The testimony of the witness Segal that the space between the car and the platform was but three inches is based on actual measurements and must prevail over mere estimates. There was no crowding.

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

Action to recover damages for personal injuries. The plaintiff was injured while in the act of boarding defendant’s subway train. Judgment reversed on the facts and a new trial granted, costs to abide the event, on the ground that the verdict is against the weight of the evidence on the theory of the facts upon which the case was submitted to the jury. The only evidence which warranted a submission to the jury was that relating to failure reasonably to control passengers emerging from the cars, if it be found that in the exercise of ordinary care there should have been such control because of pushing and shoving each morning, if the latter evidence be credited. No submission was pointedly made to the jury on this theory. Lazansky, P. J., Carswell, Adel and Taylor, JJ., concur; Hagarty, J., concurs as to the reversal, but dissents as to granting a new trial and votes to dismiss the complaint, with the following memorandum: The testimony of the witness Segal that the space between the car and the platform was but three inches is based on actual measurements and must prevail over mere estimates. There was no crowding.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

257 A.D. 990, 13 N.Y.S.2d 638, 1939 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8837, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gramaglia-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-1939.