Murphy v. Kitrinos

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Murphy v. Kitrinos

6 A.D.2d 827, 176 N.Y.S.2d 240, 1958 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5462

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

DecidedJune 23, 1958

StatusPublished

This text of 6 A.D.2d 827 (Murphy v. Kitrinos) 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

Murphy v. Kitrinos, 6 A.D.2d 827, 176 N.Y.S.2d 240, 1958 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5462 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1958).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the appeal is (1) from a judgment dismissing the complaint, entered after trial by the court without a jury, and (2) from an order denying a motion to set aside the decision and for a new trial. Appellants, passengers in a motor vehicle owned and operated by respondent Kitrinos, were injured in a collision between that vehicle and a motor vehicle owned and operated by respondent Corlett and another motor vehicle owned by respondent Diaper Service Brooklyn & Queens Corporation and operated by respondent Warren. Judgment and order affirmed, without costs. No opinion. Nolan, P. J., Beldock and Hallinan, JJ., concur; Wenzel and Murphy, JJ., concur in the affirmance of the judgment and order as to respondents Corlett, Warren and Diaper Service Brooklyn & Queens Corporation, but dissent from the affirmance of said judgment and order as to respondent Kitrinos, and as to said respondent vote to reverse the judgment and the order, to sever the action and to grant a new trial between appellants and said respondent, with the following memorandum: It is our opinion that the trial court unintentionally and unduly restricted appellants’ proof upon the trial and that the interests of justice require a new trial as to respondent Kitrinos.

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

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the appeal is (1) from a judgment dismissing the complaint, entered after trial by the court without a jury, and (2) from an order denying a motion to set aside the decision and for a new trial. Appellants, passengers in a motor vehicle owned and operated by respondent Kitrinos, were injured in a collision between that vehicle and a motor vehicle owned and operated by respondent Corlett and another motor vehicle owned by respondent Diaper Service Brooklyn & Queens Corporation and operated by respondent Warren. Judgment and order affirmed, without costs. No opinion. Nolan, P. J., Beldock and Hallinan, JJ., concur; Wenzel and Murphy, JJ., concur in the affirmance of the judgment and order as to respondents Corlett, Warren and Diaper Service Brooklyn & Queens Corporation, but dissent from the affirmance of said judgment and order as to respondent Kitrinos, and as to said respondent vote to reverse the judgment and the order, to sever the action and to grant a new trial between appellants and said respondent, with the following memorandum: It is our opinion that the trial court unintentionally and unduly restricted appellants’ proof upon the trial and that the interests of justice require a new trial as to respondent Kitrinos.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

6 A.D.2d 827, 176 N.Y.S.2d 240, 1958 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5462, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/murphy-v-kitrinos-nyappdiv-1958.