Oneto v. Greenberg

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Oneto v. Greenberg

265 A.D. 866, 37 N.Y.S.2d 773, 1942 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6237

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided November 9, 1942·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

The trial presented a dispute between the defendant and an allegedly disinterested eye witness for the respondent. The two versions of how the accident happened were in sharp conflict and were irreconcilable. The jury accepted the defendant’s version, which was amply supported by evidence which the jury had the right to find was credible. The learned trial justice was without power to assume the jury’s function and to decide where the truth lay. (Lee v. City Brewing Corp., 279 N. Y. 380, 384; Scheuerman v. Knapp Coal Co., Inc., 238 App. Div. 874.) Hagarty, Johnston, Adel, Taylor and Close, JJ., concur.

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

The trial presented a dispute between the defendant and an allegedly disinterested eye witness for the respondent. The two versions of how the accident happened were in sharp conflict and were irreconcilable. The jury accepted the defendant’s version, which was amply supported by evidence which the jury had the right to find was credible. The learned trial justice was without power to assume the jury’s function and to decide where the truth lay. (Lee v. City Brewing Corp., 279 N. Y. 380, 384; Scheuerman v. Knapp Coal Co., Inc., 238 App. Div. 874.) Hagarty, Johnston, Adel, Taylor and Close, JJ., concur.

Oneto v. Greenberg, 265 A.D. 866, 37 N.Y.S.2d 773, 1942 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6237 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1942).

Pincite

265 A.D. 866 (Oneto v. Greenberg) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related