Perevit v. Bilous

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Perevit v. Bilous

275 A.D.2d 940

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided June 6, 1949·Published

Opinion

Assuming that the evidence was sufficient to justify an inference that decedent was struck by the truck owned by defendant Bilous and operated by defendant Coteaux, it is not sufficient to justify a further inference that the contact was due to the negligence of the operator of the truck. (Wieland v. Third Ave. Tr. Corp., 296 N. Y. 1047.) Present— Carswell, Acting P. J., Johnston, Adel, Sneed and Wenzel, JJ.

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

Assuming that the evidence was sufficient to justify an inference that decedent was struck by the truck owned by defendant Bilous and operated by defendant Coteaux, it is not sufficient to justify a further inference that the contact was due to the negligence of the operator of the truck. (Wieland v. Third Ave. Tr. Corp., 296 N. Y. 1047.) Present— Carswell, Acting P. J., Johnston, Adel, Sneed and Wenzel, JJ.

Perevit v. Bilous, 275 A.D.2d 940 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1949).

Pincite

275 A.D.2d 940 (Perevit v. Bilous) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related