Jacquin v. Syracuse Auto Rental & Taxicab Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Jacquin v. Syracuse Auto Rental & Taxicab Corp.

239 A.D. 807

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided April 15, 1933·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

We are of the opinion that the judgment appealed from is correct. (Gochee v. Wagner, 232 App. Div. 401, 403; revd. on other grounds, 257 N. Y. 344.) If an appeal had been taken from the judgment entered pursuant to the verdict directed at the trial we would have the power to reverse it and grant the same judgment now here on appeal (Civ. Prac, Act, § 584), both parties having moved for a direction of a verdict. Therefore, we have decided to overlook any irregularity in the practice followed at Special Term — and to reach what we deem to be a correct result by affirming the judgment appealed from. All concur. Judgment affirmed, without costs of this appeal to either party.

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

Per Curiam.

We are of the opinion that the judgment appealed from is correct. (Gochee v. Wagner, 232 App. Div. 401, 403; revd. on other grounds, 257 N. Y. 344.) If an appeal had been taken from the judgment entered pursuant to the verdict directed at the trial we would have the power to reverse it and grant the same judgment now here on appeal (Civ. Prac, Act, § 584), both parties having moved for a direction of a verdict. Therefore, we have decided to overlook any irregularity in the practice followed at Special Term — and to reach what we deem to be a correct result by affirming the judgment appealed from. All concur. Judgment affirmed, without costs of this appeal to either party.

Jacquin v. Syracuse Auto Rental & Taxicab Corp., 239 A.D. 807 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1933).

Pincite

239 A.D. 807 (Jacquin v. Syracuse Auto Rental & Taxicab Corp.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related