Smithling v. Goldman
This text of 283 A.D. 844 (Smithling v. Goldman) 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
Judgment insofar as appealed from affirmed, without costs of this appeal to either party. All concur, except McCurn, P. J., who dissents and votes for reversal and for granting a new trial on the ground that the verdict of the jury is against the weight of evidence, and, in any event, plaintiff was entitled to recover for one day’s lost wages. (Appeal from part of a judgment for defendant for no cause of action on plaintiff’s first cause of action for conscious pain and suffering by plaintiff’s intestate, in an automobile negligence action.) Present — McCurn, P. J., Vaughan, Kimball, Piper and Wheeler, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
283 A.D. 844, 128 N.Y.S.2d 586, 1954 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5475, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smithling-v-goldman-nyappdiv-1954.