Mantione v. Picone
This text of 273 A.D. 1049 (Mantione v. Picone) 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.
Opinion
Judgment affirmed, with costs.' Memorandum: There was ample evidence from which the jury could find that the defendant’s car was being operated at a speed of at least forty-five miles an hour, and had been so operated for more than one-quarter of a mile. Such operation was prohibited by the statute then in effect. (Vehicle and Traffic Law, § 56, subd. 3, as amd. by L. 1945, [1050]*1050eh. 210, eff. March 21, 1945.) This was negligence (Martin v. Herzog, 228 N. Y. 164, 168; Homin v. Cleveland & Whitehill Co., 281 N. Y. 484) which, considered in connection with the blowout, and the number of times which the car turned over after the blowout, supports the finding of the jury that plaintiff’s injuries were proximately caused by defendant’s negligence. All concur. (The judgment is for plaintiff and against defendant Picone, and by direction of the court, in favor of defendant Picone over against defendant Mantiene for the same amount, in an automobile negligence action.) Present — Taylor, P. J., MeCurn, Love, Yaughan and Kimball, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
273 A.D. 1049, 80 N.Y.S.2d 163, 1948 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5905, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mantione-v-picone-nyappdiv-1948.