Peterson v. Olson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Peterson v. Olson

255 A.D. 1029, 8 N.Y.S.2d 1017, 1938 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6311

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided December 2, 1938·Published

Opinion

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. Memorandum: A fair question of fact is presented by the evidence. We have examined the record for errors of fact and of law and do not find any sufficiently serious to require the granting of a new trial. All concur. (The judgment is for plaintiff in an automobile negligence action. The order denies a motion for a new trial.) Present — Sears, P. J., Lewis, Cunningham, Taylor and Dowling, JJ.

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

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. Memorandum: A fair question of fact is presented by the evidence. We have examined the record for errors of fact and of law and do not find any sufficiently serious to require the granting of a new trial. All concur. (The judgment is for plaintiff in an automobile negligence action. The order denies a motion for a new trial.) Present — Sears, P. J., Lewis, Cunningham, Taylor and Dowling, JJ.

Peterson v. Olson, 255 A.D. 1029, 8 N.Y.S.2d 1017, 1938 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6311 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1938).

Pincite

255 A.D. 1029 (Peterson v. Olson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.