Resto v. Metropolitan Distributors, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Resto v. Metropolitan Distributors, Inc.

1 A.D.2d 947, 151 N.Y.S.2d 606, 1956 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5688

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

DecidedApril 24, 1956

StatusPublished

This text of 1 A.D.2d 947 (Resto v. Metropolitan Distributors, Inc.) 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

Resto v. Metropolitan Distributors, Inc., 1 A.D.2d 947, 151 N.Y.S.2d 606, 1956 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5688 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1956).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, insofar as it provides for the recovery of $50,000 by the plaintiff Carmen Resto, unanimously affirmed; insofar as the judgment provides for the recovery of $5,000 by the plaintiff Rosario Colon, unanimously reversed on the ground of excessiveness, the cause of action of said plaintiff Rosario Colon severed and a new trial thereof ordered, with costs to the appellants, unless the said plaintiff, Rosario Colon, stipulates to reduce the verdict in her favor to $2,500 in which event the judgment, as so modified, is affirmed, without costs. Settle order on notice. Concur — Breitel, J. P., Rabin, Frank, Valente and Bastow, JJ.

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

Judgment, insofar as it provides for the recovery of $50,000 by the plaintiff Carmen Resto, unanimously affirmed; insofar as the judgment provides for the recovery of $5,000 by the plaintiff Rosario Colon, unanimously reversed on the ground of excessiveness, the cause of action of said plaintiff Rosario Colon severed and a new trial thereof ordered, with costs to the appellants, unless the said plaintiff, Rosario Colon, stipulates to reduce the verdict in her favor to $2,500 in which event the judgment, as so modified, is affirmed, without costs. Settle order on notice. Concur — Breitel, J. P., Rabin, Frank, Valente and Bastow, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 A.D.2d 947, 151 N.Y.S.2d 606, 1956 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5688, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/resto-v-metropolitan-distributors-inc-nyappdiv-1956.