Sutherland v. Williams

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Sutherland v. Williams

257 A.D. 921, 12 N.Y.S.2d 1012, 1939 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8405

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

DecidedMay 19, 1939

StatusPublished

This text of 257 A.D. 921 (Sutherland v. Williams) 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

Sutherland v. Williams, 257 A.D. 921, 12 N.Y.S.2d 1012, 1939 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8405 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1939).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment and orders affirmed, with costs. Memorandum: The verdict is supported by the evidence. The motion for a new trial on the ground of newly-discovered evidence was properly denied. Eliminating from consideration the testimony of the witness whom defendant claims to be able to impeach on a new trial, the evidence would still support the verdict. All concur. (The judgment is for plaintiff in an automobile negligence action. One order denies a motion for a new trial on the minutes, and the other order denies a motion for a new trial on the ground of newly-discovered evidence relative to a criminal record of one of plaintiff’s witnesses.) Present — Sears, P. J., Crosby, Lewis, Taylor and Dowling, JJ.

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

Judgment and orders affirmed, with costs. Memorandum: The verdict is supported by the evidence. The motion for a new trial on the ground of newly-discovered evidence was properly denied. Eliminating from consideration the testimony of the witness whom defendant claims to be able to impeach on a new trial, the evidence would still support the verdict. All concur. (The judgment is for plaintiff in an automobile negligence action. One order denies a motion for a new trial on the minutes, and the other order denies a motion for a new trial on the ground of newly-discovered evidence relative to a criminal record of one of plaintiff’s witnesses.) Present — Sears, P. J., Crosby, Lewis, Taylor and Dowling, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

257 A.D. 921, 12 N.Y.S.2d 1012, 1939 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8405, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sutherland-v-williams-nyappdiv-1939.