Kennedy v. Remack

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Kennedy v. Remack

16 A.D.2d 667, 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10471

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

DecidedApril 9, 1962

StatusPublished

This text of 16 A.D.2d 667 (Kennedy v. Remack) 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

Kennedy v. Remack, 16 A.D.2d 667, 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10471 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1962).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries and medical expenses based upon the alleged negligence of the defendant in the operation of his motor vehicle, the defendant appeals from a judgment of the City Court of Yonkers, entered October 13, 1960 upon the verdict of the jury in favor of plaintiff, after trial. Judgment reversed on the law and the facts, and new trial granted, with costs to abide the event. Under all the circumstances, we believe the trial court’s answers to the several specific questions put by the jury foreman -were inadequate and rendered the charge as a whole confusing to the jury. In the interests of justice there should be a new trial. Ughetta, Acting P. J., Christ, Brennan, Rabin and Hopkins, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries and medical expenses based upon the alleged negligence of the defendant in the operation of his motor vehicle, the defendant appeals from a judgment of the City Court of Yonkers, entered October 13, 1960 upon the verdict of the jury in favor of plaintiff, after trial. Judgment reversed on the law and the facts, and new trial granted, with costs to abide the event. Under all the circumstances, we believe the trial court’s answers to the several specific questions put by the jury foreman -were inadequate and rendered the charge as a whole confusing to the jury. In the interests of justice there should be a new trial. Ughetta, Acting P. J., Christ, Brennan, Rabin and Hopkins, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

16 A.D.2d 667, 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10471, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kennedy-v-remack-nyappdiv-1962.