Kimball v. Louer

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Kimball v. Louer

267 A.D. 933, 46 N.Y.S.2d 827, 1944 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5574

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

DecidedMarch 15, 1944

StatusPublished

This text of 267 A.D. 933 (Kimball v. Louer) 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

Kimball v. Louer, 267 A.D. 933, 46 N.Y.S.2d 827, 1944 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5574 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1944).

Pincite

Opinion

This is an appeal by defendant Louer from a judgment against him, as trustee of Schenectady Railway Company, for damages in the amount of $25,000, together with interest and costs, and from an order denying defendant-appellant’s motion for a new trial. The action is in negligence, plaintiff’s injuries having been received in a collision between a bus of the railway company and an automobile in which plaintiff was riding as a passenger. The sole question here is whether damages in the amount of $25,000 rendered by the jury’s verdict are excessive. The evidence indicates that plaintiff was seriously injured, which injuries nearly resulted in his death and among other things required the removal of his spleen. We cannot find that the verdict is grossly excessive or was the result of passion or prejudice. We have held that the court “ should not usurp the functions of the jury in fixing the amount of damages in a negligence case, unless the verdict is capricious or the result of passion, prejudice or sympathy” (Jordan V. Smyk, 262 App. Div. 414), and the judgment in this case should not be disturbed. Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. All concur.

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

This is an appeal by defendant Louer from a judgment against him, as trustee of Schenectady Railway Company, for damages in the amount of $25,000, together with interest and costs, and from an order denying defendant-appellant’s motion for a new trial. The action is in negligence, plaintiff’s injuries having been received in a collision between a bus of the railway company and an automobile in which plaintiff was riding as a passenger. The sole question here is whether damages in the amount of $25,000 rendered by the jury’s verdict are excessive. The evidence indicates that plaintiff was seriously injured, which injuries nearly resulted in his death and among other things required the removal of his spleen. We cannot find that the verdict is grossly excessive or was the result of passion or prejudice. We have held that the court “ should not usurp the functions of the jury in fixing the amount of damages in a negligence case, unless the verdict is capricious or the result of passion, prejudice or sympathy” (Jordan V. Smyk, 262 App. Div. 414), and the judgment in this case should not be disturbed. Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. All concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

267 A.D. 933, 46 N.Y.S.2d 827, 1944 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5574, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kimball-v-louer-nyappdiv-1944.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack