Migoley v. Mid-Eastern Mills, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Migoley v. Mid-Eastern Mills, Inc.

47 A.D.2d 928, 369 N.Y.S.2d 1006, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9377

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

DecidedApril 21, 1975

StatusPublished

This text of 47 A.D.2d 928 (Migoley v. Mid-Eastern Mills, 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

Migoley v. Mid-Eastern Mills, Inc., 47 A.D.2d 928, 369 N.Y.S.2d 1006, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9377 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, defendants appeal from an interlocutory judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, entered April 10, 1974, against them upon the issue of liability, upon the trial court’s setting aside of the jury verdict in favor of defendants upon that issue and its direction for the entry of an interlocutory judgment in favor of plaintiff. Interlocutory judgment reversed, without costs, and jury verdict reinstated. The trial court erred in setting aside the jury verdict and in directing a verdict in plaintiff’s favor on the issue of liability. It cannot be said that the jury could not have reached its verdict on any fair interpretation of the evidence. Latham, Acting P. J., Cohalan, Christ, Brennan and Munder, JJ., concur.

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

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, defendants appeal from an interlocutory judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, entered April 10, 1974, against them upon the issue of liability, upon the trial court’s setting aside of the jury verdict in favor of defendants upon that issue and its direction for the entry of an interlocutory judgment in favor of plaintiff. Interlocutory judgment reversed, without costs, and jury verdict reinstated. The trial court erred in setting aside the jury verdict and in directing a verdict in plaintiff’s favor on the issue of liability. It cannot be said that the jury could not have reached its verdict on any fair interpretation of the evidence. Latham, Acting P. J., Cohalan, Christ, Brennan and Munder, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

47 A.D.2d 928, 369 N.Y.S.2d 1006, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9377, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/migoley-v-mid-eastern-mills-inc-nyappdiv-1975.