Ritz v. Packard Motor Car Co.
This text of 261 A.D. 908 (Ritz v. Packard Motor Car 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
In a consolidated action by plaintiffs for damages for personal injuries, property damage and loss of services following the overturning of an automobile owned by plaintiff D’Albro and manufactured by defendant Packard Motor Car Company, the complaints were dismissed at the close of plaintiffs’ case. Plaintiffs appeal. Judgment reversed on the law and the facts and a new trial granted, with costs to appellants to abide the event. The automobile was a month old and had been driven only 980 miles at the time of the accident. The evidence disclosed that the accident was the result of the breaking of a king-pin in the front left wheel assembly. Plaintiffs’ experts testified that the king-pin was defective, and that the defect could have been discovered by inspection. In our opinion plaintiffs established a prima jade case and it was error to dismiss the complaint. (MacPherson v. Buick Motor Co., 217 N. Y. 382; Smith v. Peerless Glass Co., 259 id. 292.) Lazansky, P. J., Carswell, Johnston, Adel and Close, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
261 A.D. 908, 25 N.Y.S.2d 213, 1941 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8048, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ritz-v-packard-motor-car-co-nyappdiv-1941.