Holland v. Newcomb

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Holland v. Newcomb

251 A.D. 755, 295 N.Y.S. 435, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7391

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

DecidedMay 5, 1937

StatusPublished

This text of 251 A.D. 755 (Holland v. Newcomb) 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

Holland v. Newcomb, 251 A.D. 755, 295 N.Y.S. 435, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7391 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1937).

Pincite

Opinion

Defendants Newcomb and DeGuire have appealed from judgments entered against them on verdicts of the jury and also from orders denying their motions for new trials. The actions are to recover damages for negligence arising out of a collision on December 1, 1935, on the Glens Falls-West Glens Falls highway between a Ford automobile owned by defendant DeGuire and a Dodge automobile operated by defendant Riley. The plaintiff Lois Jean Holland, a child eight years of age, was a passenger in the car of defendant Riley. She sued to recover for personal injuries. The coplaintiff, her father, sued to recover for expenses for the treatment and care of the child. The evidence clearly sustains the verdicts of the jury. Judgments and orders unanimously affirmed, with costs to plaintiffs in one action. Present — Hill, P. J., McNamee, Crapser, Bliss and Heffernan, JJ.

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

Defendants Newcomb and DeGuire have appealed from judgments entered against them on verdicts of the jury and also from orders denying their motions for new trials. The actions are to recover damages for negligence arising out of a collision on December 1, 1935, on the Glens Falls-West Glens Falls highway between a Ford automobile owned by defendant DeGuire and a Dodge automobile operated by defendant Riley. The plaintiff Lois Jean Holland, a child eight years of age, was a passenger in the car of defendant Riley. She sued to recover for personal injuries. The coplaintiff, her father, sued to recover for expenses for the treatment and care of the child. The evidence clearly sustains the verdicts of the jury. Judgments and orders unanimously affirmed, with costs to plaintiffs in one action. Present — Hill, P. J., McNamee, Crapser, Bliss and Heffernan, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

251 A.D. 755, 295 N.Y.S. 435, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7391, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/holland-v-newcomb-nyappdiv-1937.