Mazzella v. Anderson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Mazzella v. Anderson

251 A.D. 741, 296 N.Y.S. 66, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7328

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

DecidedMay 21, 1937

StatusPublished

This text of 251 A.D. 741 (Mazzella v. Anderson) 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

Mazzella v. Anderson, 251 A.D. 741, 296 N.Y.S. 66, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7328 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1937).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action for personal injuries sustained by plaintiff, a passenger in defendant Bialor’s automobile, which collided with defendant Anderson’s automobile at an intersection, judgment entered on a verdict in favor of the defendant Anderson unanimously affirmed, with costs, and judgment' in favor of defendant Bialor reversed on the law and the facts and a new trial granted, with costs to appellant to abide the event. Bialor admitted he approached Fulton street (a main highway) at thirty miles an hour and crossed it at that speed, even though he saw a sign at the intersection warning him to stop. In our opinion, the verdict in favor of Bialor is against the weight of the evidence and the charge was prejudicial to plaintiff. Hagarty, Davis, Johnston, Adel and Close, JJ., concur.

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

In an action for personal injuries sustained by plaintiff, a passenger in defendant Bialor’s automobile, which collided with defendant Anderson’s automobile at an intersection, judgment entered on a verdict in favor of the defendant Anderson unanimously affirmed, with costs, and judgment' in favor of defendant Bialor reversed on the law and the facts and a new trial granted, with costs to appellant to abide the event. Bialor admitted he approached Fulton street (a main highway) at thirty miles an hour and crossed it at that speed, even though he saw a sign at the intersection warning him to stop. In our opinion, the verdict in favor of Bialor is against the weight of the evidence and the charge was prejudicial to plaintiff. Hagarty, Davis, Johnston, Adel and Close, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

251 A.D. 741, 296 N.Y.S. 66, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7328, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mazzella-v-anderson-nyappdiv-1937.