Heinzen v. Bell

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Heinzen v. Bell

243 A.D. 826

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided March 15, 1935·Published

Opinion

Plaintiff was struck by an automobile; he suffered injury to his hip and to his elbow. The extent of these injuries was in sharp conflict between the doctors. The doctor who examined him immediately after the accident and the following day found mere abrasions and superficial injuries. There was a question of fact for the jury as to the extent of these injuries. Judgment and order unanimously affirmed, with costs. Present — Hill, P. J., Rhodes, McNamee, Bliss and Heffernan, JJ.

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

Plaintiff was struck by an automobile; he suffered injury to his hip and to his elbow. The extent of these injuries was in sharp conflict between the doctors. The doctor who examined him immediately after the accident and the following day found mere abrasions and superficial injuries. There was a question of fact for the jury as to the extent of these injuries. Judgment and order unanimously affirmed, with costs. Present — Hill, P. J., Rhodes, McNamee, Bliss and Heffernan, JJ.

Heinzen v. Bell, 243 A.D. 826 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1935).

Pincite

243 A.D. 826 (Heinzen v. Bell) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.