Pitts v. Plattsburgh Bottling Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Pitts v. Plattsburgh Bottling Co.

263 A.D. 765, 30 N.Y.S.2d 916, 1941 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4858

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

DecidedNovember 12, 1941

StatusPublished

This text of 263 A.D. 765 (Pitts v. Plattsburgh Bottling Co.) 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

Pitts v. Plattsburgh Bottling Co., 263 A.D. 765, 30 N.Y.S.2d 916, 1941 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4858 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1941).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court entered in the Clinton county clerk’s office on April 12, 1941, on the verdict of a jury in favor of the defendant, dismissing the complaint, with costs, and from an order denying motion to set aside the verdict and for a new trial. The action was to recover damages for personal injuries arising out of the explosion of a Coca-Cola bottle and was b^sed upon breaches of warranties under subdivisions 1 and 2 of section 96 of the Personal Property Law. No exceptions were taken to the charge. The jury returned a verdict of no cause of action. There was a question of fact as to whether the explosion was caused by a defect in the bottle or by the force of a blow from without. Judgment and order unanimously affirmed, with costs. Present — Hill, P. J., Bliss, Heffeman, Sehenck and Foster, JJ.

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

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court entered in the Clinton county clerk’s office on April 12, 1941, on the verdict of a jury in favor of the defendant, dismissing the complaint, with costs, and from an order denying motion to set aside the verdict and for a new trial. The action was to recover damages for personal injuries arising out of the explosion of a Coca-Cola bottle and was b^sed upon breaches of warranties under subdivisions 1 and 2 of section 96 of the Personal Property Law. No exceptions were taken to the charge. The jury returned a verdict of no cause of action. There was a question of fact as to whether the explosion was caused by a defect in the bottle or by the force of a blow from without. Judgment and order unanimously affirmed, with costs. Present — Hill, P. J., Bliss, Heffeman, Sehenck and Foster, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

263 A.D. 765, 30 N.Y.S.2d 916, 1941 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4858, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pitts-v-plattsburgh-bottling-co-nyappdiv-1941.