Spett v. President Monroe Building & Manufacturing Corp.
This text of 28 A.D.2d 923 (Spett v. President Monroe Building & Manufacturing 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.
Opinion
Beldock, P. J., Christ and Rabin, JJ., concur; Benjamin, J. concurs in reversal of the judgment but votes to reinstate the jury’s verdict, in plaintiff’s favor, with the following memorandum: When the Court of Appeals reversed our previous affirmance of the trial court’s judgment setting aside the jury verdict for plaintiff as against defendant Rose Levine, and dismissing the complaint as against her (25 A D 2d 556), it did so on two grounds, namely, (a) that the proof was sufficient to support a finding by the jury that said defendant was responsible for the placing of the skid “in this perilous position in the hallway” (p. 206) where the accident occurred, and (b) that it was improper to exclude proffered testimony that said defendant’s husband and “ general manager ” had admitted responsibility for the placement of the skid" in that position. In light of the determination by the Court of Appeals that the proof at the trial was sufficient to support the jury verdict for plaintiff against defendant Rose Levine, that verdict should be reinstated, and a new trial is neither required nor warranted. In my view, the decision of the Court of Appeals cannot be read as permitting any other result.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
28 A.D.2d 923, 282 N.Y.S.2d 968, 1967 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3578, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/spett-v-president-monroe-building-manufacturing-corp-nyappdiv-1967.