Nardone v. Miller

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Nardone v. Miller

263 A.D. 994, 33 N.Y.S.2d 271, 1942 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7804

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

DecidedMarch 2, 1942

StatusPublished

This text of 263 A.D. 994 (Nardone v. Miller) 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

Nardone v. Miller, 263 A.D. 994, 33 N.Y.S.2d 271, 1942 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7804 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1942).

Pincite

Opinion

Action to recover damages for personal injuries sustained

by respondents in a collision between an automobile in which they were riding and a truck owned by the estate of Edward H. Miller, and by plaintiff Anthony Nardone to recover also for property damage and loss of services. Judgment unanimously affirmed, with costs. While the practice is for the court to consult with the jury or a juror in the presence of counsel, we are of opinion that the incident involving ' the inquiry by the court of one of the jurors in chambers, in the absence of counsel, as to his physical ability to continue the trial, was not prejudicial to the appellant and was harmless. Appeal from denial of motion for a new trial dismissed, without costs. No order denying such motion appears in the record. Present — Hagarty, Johnston, Adel, Taylor and Close, JJ.

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

Action to recover damages for personal injuries sustained

by respondents in a collision between an automobile in which they were riding and a truck owned by the estate of Edward H. Miller, and by plaintiff Anthony Nardone to recover also for property damage and loss of services. Judgment unanimously affirmed, with costs. While the practice is for the court to consult with the jury or a juror in the presence of counsel, we are of opinion that the incident involving ' the inquiry by the court of one of the jurors in chambers, in the absence of counsel, as to his physical ability to continue the trial, was not prejudicial to the appellant and was harmless. Appeal from denial of motion for a new trial dismissed, without costs. No order denying such motion appears in the record. Present — Hagarty, Johnston, Adel, Taylor and Close, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

263 A.D. 994, 33 N.Y.S.2d 271, 1942 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7804, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nardone-v-miller-nyappdiv-1942.