Taylor v. Mansfield

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Taylor v. Mansfield

260 A.D. 1058, 24 N.Y.S.2d 520, 1940 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6031

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

DecidedDecember 30, 1940

StatusPublished

This text of 260 A.D. 1058 (Taylor v. Mansfield) 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

Taylor v. Mansfield, 260 A.D. 1058, 24 N.Y.S.2d 520, 1940 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6031 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1940).

Pincite

Opinion

Action by plaintiff wife to recover damages for personal injuries sustained when she slipped and fell on ice in front of defendant’s premises. Action by her husband for loss of services and expenses. The cases were tried together and resulted in separate judgments in favor of plaintiffs. Judgments of the County Court of Orange County, and orders denying defendant’s motion to set aside the verdicts, reversed on the law and a new trial ordered, costs to appellant to abide the event, on the ground that the charge was confusing and failed clearly to submit to the jury the issues involved. Lazansky, P. J., Adel, Taylor and Close, JJ., concur; Johnston, J., concurs in reversal of the judgments but dissents as to the granting of a new trial and votes to dismiss the complaints, with the following memorandum: There is no evidence of any channel or waterway made by defendant which caused an artificial discharge or accumulation of water upon the sidewalk or caused water to flow across the sidewalk in greater volume and constancy than it would under ordinary conditions. (See Quinlan v. St. Joseph’s Church, Troy, N. Y., 249 App. Div. 674; Stapleton v. Church of Pilgrims in City of Brooklyn, 242 id. 710; Moore v. Gadsden, 87 N. Y. 84.) The appeals from the orders denying defendant’s motions to set aside the verdicts should be dismissed.

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

Action by plaintiff wife to recover damages for personal injuries sustained when she slipped and fell on ice in front of defendant’s premises. Action by her husband for loss of services and expenses. The cases were tried together and resulted in separate judgments in favor of plaintiffs. Judgments of the County Court of Orange County, and orders denying defendant’s motion to set aside the verdicts, reversed on the law and a new trial ordered, costs to appellant to abide the event, on the ground that the charge was confusing and failed clearly to submit to the jury the issues involved. Lazansky, P. J., Adel, Taylor and Close, JJ., concur; Johnston, J., concurs in reversal of the judgments but dissents as to the granting of a new trial and votes to dismiss the complaints, with the following memorandum: There is no evidence of any channel or waterway made by defendant which caused an artificial discharge or accumulation of water upon the sidewalk or caused water to flow across the sidewalk in greater volume and constancy than it would under ordinary conditions. (See Quinlan v. St. Joseph’s Church, Troy, N. Y., 249 App. Div. 674; Stapleton v. Church of Pilgrims in City of Brooklyn, 242 id. 710; Moore v. Gadsden, 87 N. Y. 84.) The appeals from the orders denying defendant’s motions to set aside the verdicts should be dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

260 A.D. 1058, 24 N.Y.S.2d 520, 1940 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6031, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/taylor-v-mansfield-nyappdiv-1940.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack