Karrat Bros. & Co. v. State

New York Court of Appeals

Karrat Bros. & Co. v. State

3 N.Y.2d 993

CourtNew York Court of Appeals

DecidedDecember 5, 1957

DocketClaim No. 30674; Claim No. 30675; Claim No. 30676; Claim No. 30677; Claim No. 30678

StatusPublished

This text of 3 N.Y.2d 993 (Karrat Bros. & Co. v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Karrat Bros. & Co. v. State, 3 N.Y.2d 993 (N.Y. 1957).

Pincite

Opinion

As to the judgments of the Court of Claims in favor of Frieda Karrat, George Karrat, an infant, by Frieda Karrat, his guardian ad litem, and James Baya: Judgments affirmed, with costs.

As to the judgment of the Court of Claims in favor of John Karrat and the judgment of the Appellate Division in favor of Karrat Bros. & Co., Trie.: Judgments reversed and original judgments of the Court of Claims dismissing their claims reinstated, with costs in this court and in the Appellate Division, upon the ground that the preponderance of the credible evidence supports a finding that John Karrat was guilty of contributory negligence in driving the vehicle of the corporation in its service. No opinion.

[996]*996Concur: Judges Dye, Froessel, Van Voorhis and Burke. Chief Judge Conway and Judges Desmond and Fuld dissent as to the reversal of the judgments in favor of John Karrat and Karrat Bros. & Co., Inc., and vote to affirm said judgments.

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

As to the judgments of the Court of Claims in favor of Frieda Karrat, George Karrat, an infant, by Frieda Karrat, his guardian ad litem, and James Baya: Judgments affirmed, with costs.

As to the judgment of the Court of Claims in favor of John Karrat and the judgment of the Appellate Division in favor of Karrat Bros. & Co., Trie.: Judgments reversed and original judgments of the Court of Claims dismissing their claims reinstated, with costs in this court and in the Appellate Division, upon the ground that the preponderance of the credible evidence supports a finding that John Karrat was guilty of contributory negligence in driving the vehicle of the corporation in its service. No opinion.

[996]*996Concur: Judges Dye, Froessel, Van Voorhis and Burke. Chief Judge Conway and Judges Desmond and Fuld dissent as to the reversal of the judgments in favor of John Karrat and Karrat Bros. & Co., Inc., and vote to affirm said judgments.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

3 N.Y.2d 993, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/karrat-bros-co-v-state-ny-1957.