Steiner v. Rafanieczus
This text of 173 Misc. 423 (Steiner v. Rafanieczus) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court 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 and order in so far as it affects the corporate defendant unanimously reversed upon the law, and new trial granted, with thirty dollars costs to that defendant to abide the event.
The action was to recover property damage resulting from a collision between plaintiff’s car and a truck owned by the corporate defendant and operated by the individual defendant. The jury, contrary to instructions and to the law, found a verdict against the corporate defendant and in favor of the individual defendant. The verdict was set aside and thereafter reinstated upon the consent of the individual defendant that a verdict be directed against him in the same amount as found by the jury against the corporate defendant. The verdict effectuated an inconsistent result. The corporate defendant’s liability was purely of a derivative or secondary character. Having exonerated the individual defendant, [424]*424its employee, the jury should have rendered a verdict in favor of the corporate defendant. The inconsistency could not be cured by the consent of the individual defendant that a verdict be directed against him.
Present — MacCrate, Lewis and Smith, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
173 Misc. 423, 18 N.Y.S.2d 41, 1939 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2715, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/steiner-v-rafanieczus-nyappterm-1939.