Prendergast v. Interborough Rapid Transit Co.
This text of 172 A.D. 967 (Prendergast v. Interborough Rapid Transit 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.
Opinion
Order reversed, with costs, motion for new trial granted, costs to abide the event, upon the ground that the court erred in its charge upon the subject of adverse inference permissible to be drawn from the unexplained absence of a witness to a material fact. (Wade v. City of Mount Vernon, 133 App. Div. 389, 390; Reehil v. Fraas, 129 id. 563, 566.) Thomas, Stapleton, Mills and Putnam, JJ., concurred; Jenks, P. J., dissented upon the ground that the instructions in question as made at folios 652, 653 a.nd 672 did not constitute capital error.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
172 A.D. 967, 157 N.Y.S. 1142, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/prendergast-v-interborough-rapid-transit-co-nyappdiv-1916.