Randall v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Randall v. City of New York

18 A.D.2d 1009, 238 N.Y.S.2d 661, 1963 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4212

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

DecidedMarch 11, 1963

StatusPublished

This text of 18 A.D.2d 1009 (Randall v. City of New York) 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

Randall v. City of New York, 18 A.D.2d 1009, 238 N.Y.S.2d 661, 1963 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4212 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1963).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages, based upon an allegedly illegal arrest and assault, defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated March 15, 1962, which granted plaintiff’s motion, pursuant to section 549 of the Civil Practice Act, to set aside the jury’s verdict in favor of defendant, and which directed a new trial. Order reversed, without costs, plaintiff’s motion denied, and verdict for defendant reinstated. On the proof adduced, it may not be held that the evidence preponderated so greatly in favor of the plaintiff as to establish that the jury’s verdict for the defendant could not have been reached upon any fair interpretation of the evidence (cf. Areson v. Hempstead Bus Corp., 14 A D 2d 790). We again call attention to the rule that when the trial court sets aside a verdict, the reasons for such action should be stated (Coleman v. Brooklyn & Queens Tr. Corp., 252 App. Div. 215, 216). Beldock, P. J., Klenfeld, Christ, Brennan and Rabin, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to recover damages, based upon an allegedly illegal arrest and assault, defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated March 15, 1962, which granted plaintiff’s motion, pursuant to section 549 of the Civil Practice Act, to set aside the jury’s verdict in favor of defendant, and which directed a new trial. Order reversed, without costs, plaintiff’s motion denied, and verdict for defendant reinstated. On the proof adduced, it may not be held that the evidence preponderated so greatly in favor of the plaintiff as to establish that the jury’s verdict for the defendant could not have been reached upon any fair interpretation of the evidence (cf. Areson v. Hempstead Bus Corp., 14 A D 2d 790). We again call attention to the rule that when the trial court sets aside a verdict, the reasons for such action should be stated (Coleman v. Brooklyn & Queens Tr. Corp., 252 App. Div. 215, 216). Beldock, P. J., Klenfeld, Christ, Brennan and Rabin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

18 A.D.2d 1009, 238 N.Y.S.2d 661, 1963 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4212, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/randall-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-1963.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack