Mohr v. New York Centrad Railroad

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Mohr v. New York Centrad Railroad

28 A.D.2d 1074, 1967 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3314

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

DecidedOctober 19, 1967

StatusPublished

This text of 28 A.D.2d 1074 (Mohr v. New York Centrad Railroad) 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

Mohr v. New York Centrad Railroad, 28 A.D.2d 1074, 1967 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3314 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1967).

Pincite

Opinion

Memorandum: The motion to dismiss the complaint made at the close of the evidence by defendant railroad company should have been granted. Upon all the proof the jury by no rational process could have based a finding that this defendant was negligent (cf. Blum v. Fresh Grown Preserve Corp., 292 N. Y. 241; 4 Weinstein-Korn-Miller, N. Y. Civ. Prac., par. 4401.14). The jury returned a verdict against all defendants of $35,000 “plus expensesThe court refused [1075]*1075to accept the verdict and with precision instructed the jury that the “ expenses ” totaled $3,491.25. Plaintiff’s counsel concurred in the instruction. In eight minutes the jury returned with a verdict of $45,000. Upon all the proof we find that plaintiff’s recovery should he $38,491.25. (Appeal from judgment of Onondaga Trial Term, in an action for damages for wrongful death.) Present — Bastow, J. P., Henry, Del Veechio and Marsh, JJ.

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

Memorandum: The motion to dismiss the complaint made at the close of the evidence by defendant railroad company should have been granted. Upon all the proof the jury by no rational process could have based a finding that this defendant was negligent (cf. Blum v. Fresh Grown Preserve Corp., 292 N. Y. 241; 4 Weinstein-Korn-Miller, N. Y. Civ. Prac., par. 4401.14). The jury returned a verdict against all defendants of $35,000 “plus expensesThe court refused [1075]*1075to accept the verdict and with precision instructed the jury that the “ expenses ” totaled $3,491.25. Plaintiff’s counsel concurred in the instruction. In eight minutes the jury returned with a verdict of $45,000. Upon all the proof we find that plaintiff’s recovery should he $38,491.25. (Appeal from judgment of Onondaga Trial Term, in an action for damages for wrongful death.) Present — Bastow, J. P., Henry, Del Veechio and Marsh, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

28 A.D.2d 1074, 1967 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3314, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mohr-v-new-york-centrad-railroad-nyappdiv-1967.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack