Johnson v. Beyer

139 N.E.2d 149, 2 N.Y.2d 762
New York Court of Appeals·Decided November 15, 1956·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

In each action: Judgment of the Appellate Division and that of the Trial Term reversed and the complaint dismissed as against defendant Herpst, with costs in all courts, upon the ground that there is no testimony of sufficient probative quality and substance to justify an inference that the decedent Zazynski was, in fact, driving the Beeman car at the time of the collision. Conjecture and surmise may not be used as a substitute for such testimony (Towne v. Bunce, 307 N. Y. 868). No opinion.

Concur: Conway, Ch. J., Desmond, Dye, Fuld, Froessel, Van Voorhis and Burke, JJ.

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

Johnson v. Beyer, 139 N.E.2d 149, 2 N.Y.2d 762 (N.Y. 1956).

139 N.E.2d 149 (Johnson v. Beyer) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Jones v. United States
272 F. Supp. 679 (S.D. New York, 1967)