Hunt v. Schultz

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Hunt v. Schultz

21 A.D.2d 743, 250 N.Y.S.2d 378, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3755

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

DecidedMay 21, 1964

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 21 A.D.2d 743 (Hunt v. Schultz) 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

Hunt v. Schultz, 21 A.D.2d 743, 250 N.Y.S.2d 378, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3755 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1964).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment and orders unanimously reversed on the law and facts and a new trial granted, with costs to the appellant to abide the event. Memorandum: The verdicts in favor of each of these plaintiffs are totally irreconcilable and inconsistent. Contributory negligence is conduct on the part of a plaintiff which falls below the standard to which he should conform for his own protection (Restatement, Torts, § 463). Where, as here, there is one accident and a continuous course of conduct on the part of a driver of a vehicle, a jury determination that that driver violated a duty to another of necessity includes a finding that the same driver violated the duty owed to himself for his own protection. (Appeal from judgment of Erie Trial Term in favor of plaintiff in an automobile negligence action; also, appeal from order denying motion for a new trial and appeal from order denying motion under Civ. Prac. Act, § 457-a.) Present—■ Williams, P. J., Bastow, Henry, Noonan and Del Veechio, JJ.

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

Judgment and orders unanimously reversed on the law and facts and a new trial granted, with costs to the appellant to abide the event. Memorandum: The verdicts in favor of each of these plaintiffs are totally irreconcilable and inconsistent. Contributory negligence is conduct on the part of a plaintiff which falls below the standard to which he should conform for his own protection (Restatement, Torts, § 463). Where, as here, there is one accident and a continuous course of conduct on the part of a driver of a vehicle, a jury determination that that driver violated a duty to another of necessity includes a finding that the same driver violated the duty owed to himself for his own protection. (Appeal from judgment of Erie Trial Term in favor of plaintiff in an automobile negligence action; also, appeal from order denying motion for a new trial and appeal from order denying motion under Civ. Prac. Act, § 457-a.) Present—■ Williams, P. J., Bastow, Henry, Noonan and Del Veechio, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

21 A.D.2d 743, 250 N.Y.S.2d 378, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3755, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hunt-v-schultz-nyappdiv-1964.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack