Smith v. Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Smith v. Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification Corp.

37 A.D.2d 764, 324 N.Y.S.2d 481, 1971 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3452

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

DecidedSeptember 16, 1971

StatusPublished

This text of 37 A.D.2d 764 (Smith v. Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification 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

Smith v. Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification Corp., 37 A.D.2d 764, 324 N.Y.S.2d 481, 1971 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3452 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1971).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County, entered on April 16, 1971, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs and without disbursements, and the matter remanded for a further hearing. The evidence as presented, including the medical evidence, does not support the determination. It is noted also that the petitioner was not available or could not be located to testify. Because of the nature and extent of the injuries, it is felt that petitioner should be afforded an opportunity, if he can, to supply the deficiency in the proof. The case is remanded solely for that purpose. Concur—Stevens, P. J., Capozzoli, McGivem, Steuer and Tilzer, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County, entered on April 16, 1971, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs and without disbursements, and the matter remanded for a further hearing. The evidence as presented, including the medical evidence, does not support the determination. It is noted also that the petitioner was not available or could not be located to testify. Because of the nature and extent of the injuries, it is felt that petitioner should be afforded an opportunity, if he can, to supply the deficiency in the proof. The case is remanded solely for that purpose. Concur—Stevens, P. J., Capozzoli, McGivem, Steuer and Tilzer, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

37 A.D.2d 764, 324 N.Y.S.2d 481, 1971 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3452, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smith-v-motor-vehicle-accident-indemnification-corp-nyappdiv-1971.