Hilts v. City of Buffalo

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Hilts v. City of Buffalo

29 A.D.2d 621, 285 N.Y.S.2d 481, 1967 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2824

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

DecidedDecember 7, 1967

StatusPublished

This text of 29 A.D.2d 621 (Hilts v. City of Buffalo) 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

Hilts v. City of Buffalo, 29 A.D.2d 621, 285 N.Y.S.2d 481, 1967 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2824 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1967).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment and order reversed on the law, the facts, and in the interests of justice, and new trial granted, without costs. Memorandum: Our decision in Deacon v. City of Buffalo (29 A D 2d 620) decided contemporaneously herewith mandates reversal of this judgment and a new trial. While plaintiff herein had no cause of action based upon the icy condition of the street the jury obviously was confused and attempted to allocate 73% of the amount of the verdict against the city and 27% against the operator of the city car. This was probably due to the fact that the court in its instructions did not with precision outline the causes of action asserted by the respective plaintiffs. All concur, except Henry and Marsh, JJ., who dissent and vote to affirm, in the same Memorandum as in Deacon v. City of Buffalo, decided herewith. (Appeal from judgment and order of Erie Trial Term, in action for property damage to car.) Present — Bastow, J. P., Goldman, Henry, Del Vecchio and Marsh, JJ.

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

Judgment and order reversed on the law, the facts, and in the interests of justice, and new trial granted, without costs. Memorandum: Our decision in Deacon v. City of Buffalo (29 A D 2d 620) decided contemporaneously herewith mandates reversal of this judgment and a new trial. While plaintiff herein had no cause of action based upon the icy condition of the street the jury obviously was confused and attempted to allocate 73% of the amount of the verdict against the city and 27% against the operator of the city car. This was probably due to the fact that the court in its instructions did not with precision outline the causes of action asserted by the respective plaintiffs. All concur, except Henry and Marsh, JJ., who dissent and vote to affirm, in the same Memorandum as in Deacon v. City of Buffalo, decided herewith. (Appeal from judgment and order of Erie Trial Term, in action for property damage to car.) Present — Bastow, J. P., Goldman, Henry, Del Vecchio and Marsh, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

29 A.D.2d 621, 285 N.Y.S.2d 481, 1967 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2824, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hilts-v-city-of-buffalo-nyappdiv-1967.