Swarthout v. Van Auken

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Swarthout v. Van Auken

227 A.D. 644

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided June 15, 1929·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

On the law as laid down by the trial court in the charge to the jury, we think- that the granting of the new trial on questions of fact was not [645]*645erroneous. We find no abuse of discretion. It is, therefore, not incumbent upon us to determine the interesting question as to the effect of section 282-e of the Highway Law which has been argued before us, and we are not to be taken as passing upon the construction of the law which was dealt with by the learned trial court in its opinion, which is reported in 132 Miscellaneous, 89. The order appealed from, therefore, should be affirmed, with costs. All concur. Present — Sears, P. J., Taylor, Edgeomb, Thompson and Crosby, JJ. Order affirmed, with costs.

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

Per Curiam.

On the law as laid down by the trial court in the charge to the jury, we think- that the granting of the new trial on questions of fact was not [645]*645erroneous. We find no abuse of discretion. It is, therefore, not incumbent upon us to determine the interesting question as to the effect of section 282-e of the Highway Law which has been argued before us, and we are not to be taken as passing upon the construction of the law which was dealt with by the learned trial court in its opinion, which is reported in 132 Miscellaneous, 89. The order appealed from, therefore, should be affirmed, with costs. All concur. Present — Sears, P. J., Taylor, Edgeomb, Thompson and Crosby, JJ. Order affirmed, with costs.

Swarthout v. Van Auken, 227 A.D. 644 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1929).

Pincite

227 A.D. 644 (Swarthout v. Van Auken) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related