Roberts v. Homer P. Snyder Manufacturing Co.

242 A.D. 244, 274 N.Y.S. 527, 1934 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6037
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedSeptember 26, 1934
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 242 A.D. 244 (Roberts v. Homer P. Snyder Manufacturing 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.

Bluebook
Roberts v. Homer P. Snyder Manufacturing Co., 242 A.D. 244, 274 N.Y.S. 527, 1934 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6037 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1934).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The complaint for malicious prosecution sets forth, among other things, that defendant instituted the criminal proceeding against plaintiff. This allegation was traversed by defendant’s general denial. Later in its answer defendant pleaded some special and partial defenses in the form: That in causing the arrest,” defendant did so on the advice of the proper authorities, and without malice, etc. If, as claimed by the appellant, it was error for the court to charge the jury, as a matter of law, that defendant was bound by its admission, in its special defenses, of a fact denied in its general denial (Brady v. Hutkoff, 13 Misc. 515; affd. on opinion below, 155 N. Y. 681; Balmford v. Grand Lodge, 19 Misc. 1; Kelly v. Theiss, 22 id. 530; Young v. Katz, 5 N. Y. Ann. Cas. 58, and notes thereon), the defendant failed to take an [245]*245exception to such charge, and cannot now avail itself of the question of law. We think the questions decided were fair jury questions, and we find no error.

All concur, except Edgcomb, J., who dissents and votes for reversal on the law and facts in respect of want of probable cause, and for a new trial. Present — Sears, P. J., Edgcomb, Thompson, Crosby and Lewis, JJ.

Order reversed on the facts and motion for a new trial denied, and judgment modified by increasing the amount of the verdict to $1,100, and as modified affirmed, with costs to the plaintiff.

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

Related

Feldman v. Feldman
25 Misc. 2d 688 (New York Supreme Court, 1960)
Grace v. Dry Dock Savings Bank
3 A.D.2d 556 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1957)
Brown v. Du Frey
134 N.E.2d 469 (New York Court of Appeals, 1956)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
242 A.D. 244, 274 N.Y.S. 527, 1934 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6037, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/roberts-v-homer-p-snyder-manufacturing-co-nyappdiv-1934.