Kroemer v. Raybestos Manhattan, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Kroemer v. Raybestos Manhattan, Inc.

247 A.D. 105, 286 N.Y.S. 207, 1936 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8192

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

DecidedMarch 13, 1936

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 247 A.D. 105 (Kroemer v. Raybestos Manhattan, Inc.) 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

Kroemer v. Raybestos Manhattan, Inc., 247 A.D. 105, 286 N.Y.S. 207, 1936 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8192 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1936).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

We believe it unnecessary to review the facts out of which this litigation arose, other than to state that it involved a collision between a passenger car and defendant-appellant’s truck.

While a question of fact was presented for the jury to determine, we cannot permit the judgment to stand because we are of the opinion that the charge was neither adequate nor sufficient to enable the jury to reach an intelligent conclusion. Some abstract legal principles were stated, but practically no reference was made to the evidence, although the issues were closely contested and considerable testimony was taken during the course of the trial which lasted several days.

Accordingly, the judgment should be reversed and a new trial ordered, with costs to the appellant to abide the event.

Present — Martin, P. J., Glennon, Untermyer, Dore and Cohn, JJ.

Judgment reversed and a new trial ordered, with costs to the appellant to abide the event.

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