Hayes v. State

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Hayes v. State

278 A.D. 611, 101 N.Y.S.2d 870

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

DecidedJanuary 10, 1951

DocketClaim No. 29057

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 278 A.D. 611 (Hayes v. State) 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

Hayes v. State, 278 A.D. 611, 101 N.Y.S.2d 870 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1951).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by the State of New York from a judgment of the Court of Claims in favor of the claimant-respondent for the sum of $2,640. Claimant was charged with the possession of an illegal number of fish. Without being placed formally under arrest he agreed to proceed with two game protectors to Saranac Lake to discuss the matter with the district game protector. On the way a controversy arose over possession of the fish and one of the game protectors employed force against the body of claimant, which the Court of Claims held was excessive and unwarranted under the circumstances. As a result of the force employed claimant suffered bodily injuries and was awarded the sum of $2,500 therefor, together with $140 in medical [612]*612expenses. We think the evidence amply sustains the decision of the Court of Claims. Judgment of the Court of Claims unanimously affirmed, with costs. Present — Foster, P. J., Heffernan, Deyo, Bergan and Coon, JJ.

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

—Appeal by the State of New York from a judgment of the Court of Claims in favor of the claimant-respondent for the sum of $2,640. Claimant was charged with the possession of an illegal number of fish. Without being placed formally under arrest he agreed to proceed with two game protectors to Saranac Lake to discuss the matter with the district game protector. On the way a controversy arose over possession of the fish and one of the game protectors employed force against the body of claimant, which the Court of Claims held was excessive and unwarranted under the circumstances. As a result of the force employed claimant suffered bodily injuries and was awarded the sum of $2,500 therefor, together with $140 in medical [612]*612expenses. We think the evidence amply sustains the decision of the Court of Claims. Judgment of the Court of Claims unanimously affirmed, with costs. Present — Foster, P. J., Heffernan, Deyo, Bergan and Coon, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

278 A.D. 611, 101 N.Y.S.2d 870, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hayes-v-state-nyappdiv-1951.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack