Hull v. Schake

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Hull v. Schake

256 A.D. 888, 9 N.Y.S.2d 55, 1939 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5246

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

DecidedJanuary 5, 1939

StatusPublished

This text of 256 A.D. 888 (Hull v. Schake) 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

Hull v. Schake, 256 A.D. 888, 9 N.Y.S.2d 55, 1939 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5246 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1939).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. Memorandum: We conclude that the jury’s determination which found no actionable negligence by the defendant, was in accord with the weight of evidence and that the plaintiff’s rights were not prejudiced by any ruling of the trial court. All concur. (The judgment is for defendant in an automobile negligence action. The order denies a motion for a new trial.) Present — Sears, P. J., Crosby, Lewis, Cunningham and Taylor, JJ.

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

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. Memorandum: We conclude that the jury’s determination which found no actionable negligence by the defendant, was in accord with the weight of evidence and that the plaintiff’s rights were not prejudiced by any ruling of the trial court. All concur. (The judgment is for defendant in an automobile negligence action. The order denies a motion for a new trial.) Present — Sears, P. J., Crosby, Lewis, Cunningham and Taylor, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

256 A.D. 888, 9 N.Y.S.2d 55, 1939 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5246, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hull-v-schake-nyappdiv-1939.