Pincus v. Hults

New York Court of Appeals

Pincus v. Hults

181 N.E.2d 218, 11 N.Y.2d 709

DecidedJanuary 25, 1962

StatusPublished

This text of 181 N.E.2d 218 (Pincus v. Hults) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Pincus v. Hults, 181 N.E.2d 218, 11 N.Y.2d 709 (N.Y. 1962).

Pincite

Opinion

Concur: Chief Judge Desmond and Judges Dye, Fuld, Van Voobhis, Burke and Foster. Judge Froessel dissents and votes to affirm in the following memorandum: I agree with the Appellate Division that upon this record there is no substantial evidence that respondent was operating his automobile “in a manner showing a reckless disregard for life or property of others”, a necessary basis for a finding of gross negligence (Vehicle and Traffic Law, former § 71, subd. 3, par. [e]).

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

Concur: Chief Judge Desmond and Judges Dye, Fuld, Van Voobhis, Burke and Foster. Judge Froessel dissents and votes to affirm in the following memorandum: I agree with the Appellate Division that upon this record there is no substantial evidence that respondent was operating his automobile “in a manner showing a reckless disregard for life or property of others”, a necessary basis for a finding of gross negligence (Vehicle and Traffic Law, former § 71, subd. 3, par. [e]).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

181 N.E.2d 218, 11 N.Y.2d 709, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pincus-v-hults-ny-1962.