Joy v. City of Jamestown

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Joy v. City of Jamestown

7 A.D.2d 619, 179 N.Y.S.2d 423, 1958 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4449

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

DecidedOctober 29, 1958

StatusPublished

This text of 7 A.D.2d 619 (Joy v. City of Jamestown) 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

Joy v. City of Jamestown, 7 A.D.2d 619, 179 N.Y.S.2d 423, 1958 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4449 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1958).

Pincite

Opinion

Order affirmed, with costs. Memorandum: Though we do not adopt in their entirety the views expressed by the trial court, we believe the ultimate decision setting aside the verdicts in the interests of justice was sound since the verdicts in our opinion were against the weight of the evidence. All concur, except Williams, J., who dissents and votes to reverse the order and to reinstate the verdict of the jury. (Appeal from order of Chautauqua Trial Term setting aside the verdict of a jury in favor of defendant bus company for no cause of action, and granting a new trial as to said defendant, in a negligence action.) Present — Kimball, J. P., Williams, Bastow, Goldman and Halpern, JJ.

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

Order affirmed, with costs. Memorandum: Though we do not adopt in their entirety the views expressed by the trial court, we believe the ultimate decision setting aside the verdicts in the interests of justice was sound since the verdicts in our opinion were against the weight of the evidence. All concur, except Williams, J., who dissents and votes to reverse the order and to reinstate the verdict of the jury. (Appeal from order of Chautauqua Trial Term setting aside the verdict of a jury in favor of defendant bus company for no cause of action, and granting a new trial as to said defendant, in a negligence action.) Present — Kimball, J. P., Williams, Bastow, Goldman and Halpern, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

7 A.D.2d 619, 179 N.Y.S.2d 423, 1958 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4449, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/joy-v-city-of-jamestown-nyappdiv-1958.