Slater v. Brooklyn & Queens Transit Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Slater v. Brooklyn & Queens Transit Corp.

263 A.D. 1017, 33 N.Y.S.2d 938, 1942 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7905

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

DecidedMarch 23, 1942

StatusPublished

This text of 263 A.D. 1017 (Slater v. Brooklyn & Queens Transit Corp.) 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

Slater v. Brooklyn & Queens Transit Corp., 263 A.D. 1017, 33 N.Y.S.2d 938, 1942 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7905 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1942).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover for the wrongful death of plaintiff’s intestate who, plaintiff claims, was struck by the corporate defendant’s trolley car while he was crossing the street, the jury rendered a verdict for plaintiff for $6,000. The court, on a reserved motion, set aside the verdict and dismissed the complaint, holding that there was no evidence showing negligence on the part of defendant’s motorman. Order and judgment affirmed, -with costs. No opinion. Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Johnston and Taylor, JJ., concur; Close, J., concurs for affirmance of the order in so far as it set aside the verdict, but dissents otherwise and votes to reverse the judgment and, on the ground that the evidence presented a question of fact for the jury, votes to grant a new trial.

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

In an action to recover for the wrongful death of plaintiff’s intestate who, plaintiff claims, was struck by the corporate defendant’s trolley car while he was crossing the street, the jury rendered a verdict for plaintiff for $6,000. The court, on a reserved motion, set aside the verdict and dismissed the complaint, holding that there was no evidence showing negligence on the part of defendant’s motorman. Order and judgment affirmed, -with costs. No opinion. Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Johnston and Taylor, JJ., concur; Close, J., concurs for affirmance of the order in so far as it set aside the verdict, but dissents otherwise and votes to reverse the judgment and, on the ground that the evidence presented a question of fact for the jury, votes to grant a new trial.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

263 A.D. 1017, 33 N.Y.S.2d 938, 1942 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7905, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/slater-v-brooklyn-queens-transit-corp-nyappdiv-1942.