Reichel v. Katz

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Reichel v. Katz

23 A.D.2d 834, 259 N.Y.S.2d 658, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4153

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

DecidedMay 18, 1965

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 23 A.D.2d 834 (Reichel v. Katz) 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

Reichel v. Katz, 23 A.D.2d 834, 259 N.Y.S.2d 658, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4153 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment unanimously modified, on the law and on the facts, to the extent of vacating the verdict in favor of plaintiff Edith Reiehel in the sum of $20,172 and granting a new trial as to defendants-appellants Irving Katz and Rose Rosa, and, as so modified, affirmed, with $50 costs to defendants-appellants, unless plaintiff stipulates to accept $12,500 in lieu of the award by verdict, in which event the judgment is modified to that extent, and is affirmed as thus modified, with $50 costs to defendants-appellants. In this personal injury action it is evident that the jury verdict is grossly excessive in its award of damages, and that a verdict in excess of $12,500 is not warranted by the record. Concur — Botein, P. J., Eager and Steuer, JJ.; Rabin and McNally, JJ., dissent, in part, and vote to reverse and dismiss the complaint against defendant-appellant Rose Rosa on the ground that the record fails to establish actionable negligence as to her. Settle order on notice.

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

Judgment unanimously modified, on the law and on the facts, to the extent of vacating the verdict in favor of plaintiff Edith Reiehel in the sum of $20,172 and granting a new trial as to defendants-appellants Irving Katz and Rose Rosa, and, as so modified, affirmed, with $50 costs to defendants-appellants, unless plaintiff stipulates to accept $12,500 in lieu of the award by verdict, in which event the judgment is modified to that extent, and is affirmed as thus modified, with $50 costs to defendants-appellants. In this personal injury action it is evident that the jury verdict is grossly excessive in its award of damages, and that a verdict in excess of $12,500 is not warranted by the record. Concur — Botein, P. J., Eager and Steuer, JJ.; Rabin and McNally, JJ., dissent, in part, and vote to reverse and dismiss the complaint against defendant-appellant Rose Rosa on the ground that the record fails to establish actionable negligence as to her. Settle order on notice.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

23 A.D.2d 834, 259 N.Y.S.2d 658, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4153, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/reichel-v-katz-nyappdiv-1965.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack