Toorock v. Delevan Smelting & Refining Works, Inc.
This text of 242 A.D. 705 (Toorock v. Delevan Smelting & Refining Works, Inc.) 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
Judgment reversed on the law and the facts and a new trial granted, with costs to the appellants to abide the event. The trial court by the charge and statements during the trial too plainly indicated to the jury its doubt of the justice of plaintiffs’ case. Plaintiff Ethel Jacobwitz did not verify the complaint or the first bill of particulars by which it was claimed she had a fractured leg. By an amended bill of particulars, which she did verify, and on the trial, she did not claim she had a fractured leg. The court charged that the claim in the complaint and the first bill of particulars was untruthful, and no reference was made to the second bill of particulars or plaintiff’s position [706]*706on the trial. Plaintiff Ethel’s veracity was a question for the jury and not for the court. The court charged the jury that if the driver of defendant’s car was “ crowded ” defendant was absolved from liability. Something further was required of defendant’s driver to explain the fact that he had gone on the sidewalk and struck a post. In the interests of justice a new trial must be ordered. Lazansky, P. J., Young, Hagarty, Scudder and Davis, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
242 A.D. 705, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/toorock-v-delevan-smelting-refining-works-inc-nyappdiv-1934.