Seward v. Motz

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Seward v. Motz

22 A.D.2d 1009, 254 N.Y.S.2d 1021, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2597

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

DecidedDecember 10, 1964

StatusPublished

This text of 22 A.D.2d 1009 (Seward v. Motz) 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

Seward v. Motz, 22 A.D.2d 1009, 254 N.Y.S.2d 1021, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2597 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1964).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment insofar as appealed from and order unanimously reversed on the law and facts and a new trial granted, with costs to the appellant to abide the event, unless the defendant shall, within 10 days, stipulate to increase the verdict to the sum of $25,000, as of the date of the rendition thereof, in which event the judgment is modified accordingly and, as so modified is, together with the order, affirmed, with costs to the appellant. Memorandum: The verdict of the jury was so inadequate as to shock judicial conscience. (Appeal from part of a judgment of Niagara Trial Term for plaintiff in an automobile negligence action; also appeal from order denying a motion for a new trial.) Present — Bastow, J. P., Goldman, Henry, Noonan and Del Veeehio, JJ.

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

Judgment insofar as appealed from and order unanimously reversed on the law and facts and a new trial granted, with costs to the appellant to abide the event, unless the defendant shall, within 10 days, stipulate to increase the verdict to the sum of $25,000, as of the date of the rendition thereof, in which event the judgment is modified accordingly and, as so modified is, together with the order, affirmed, with costs to the appellant. Memorandum: The verdict of the jury was so inadequate as to shock judicial conscience. (Appeal from part of a judgment of Niagara Trial Term for plaintiff in an automobile negligence action; also appeal from order denying a motion for a new trial.) Present — Bastow, J. P., Goldman, Henry, Noonan and Del Veeehio, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

22 A.D.2d 1009, 254 N.Y.S.2d 1021, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2597, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/seward-v-motz-nyappdiv-1964.