Groben v. Edel

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Groben v. Edel

273 A.D. 1018, 79 N.Y.S.2d 525, 1948 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5815

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

DecidedMay 17, 1948

StatusPublished

This text of 273 A.D. 1018 (Groben v. Edel) 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

Groben v. Edel, 273 A.D. 1018, 79 N.Y.S.2d 525, 1948 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5815 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1948).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for assault, the court awarded plaintiff $6,500, and defendant appeals. Judgment unanimously affirmed, with costs. The proof justified a finding that defendant was guilty of a brutal, wanton and unprovoked assault. He offered no proof to controvert plaintiff’s evidence that as a result of such assault plaintiff suffered serious injuries, including a fracture of the skull, and it may not be held that the verdict is excessive. Loss of earnings may be shown under the general allegation of damage and need not be specifically alleged because it is a necessary and direct result of an injury and constitutes a damage which the law implies. (Keiffert v. Nassau Electric R. R. Co., 51 App. Div, 301; Cabot v. McKane, 41 Hun 642, opinion in 1 N. Y. St. Rep. 495; Hubert v. Bedell, 66 Hun 631, opinion in 21 N. Y. S. 305; Mellwitz v. Manhattan Ry. Co., 62 Hun 622, opinion in 17 N. Y. S. 112; 15,Am. Jur., Damages, § 315; 17 C. J., Damages, § 312; 2 Clark, New York Law of Damages, § 773.) Present — Lewis, P. J., Carswell, Johnston, Adel and Sneed, JJ.

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

In an action to recover damages for assault, the court awarded plaintiff $6,500, and defendant appeals. Judgment unanimously affirmed, with costs. The proof justified a finding that defendant was guilty of a brutal, wanton and unprovoked assault. He offered no proof to controvert plaintiff’s evidence that as a result of such assault plaintiff suffered serious injuries, including a fracture of the skull, and it may not be held that the verdict is excessive. Loss of earnings may be shown under the general allegation of damage and need not be specifically alleged because it is a necessary and direct result of an injury and constitutes a damage which the law implies. (Keiffert v. Nassau Electric R. R. Co., 51 App. Div, 301; Cabot v. McKane, 41 Hun 642, opinion in 1 N. Y. St. Rep. 495; Hubert v. Bedell, 66 Hun 631, opinion in 21 N. Y. S. 305; Mellwitz v. Manhattan Ry. Co., 62 Hun 622, opinion in 17 N. Y. S. 112; 15,Am. Jur., Damages, § 315; 17 C. J., Damages, § 312; 2 Clark, New York Law of Damages, § 773.) Present — Lewis, P. J., Carswell, Johnston, Adel and Sneed, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

273 A.D. 1018, 79 N.Y.S.2d 525, 1948 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5815, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/groben-v-edel-nyappdiv-1948.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack