Towley v. King Arthur Rings, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Towley v. King Arthur Rings, Inc.

54 A.D.2d 661, 387 N.Y.S.2d 993, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14189

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided October 26, 1976·Published

Opinion

On remand from the Court of Appeals for a review of the facts, judgment, Supreme Court, New York County, entered on October 28, 1974, unanimously af[662] firmed. Plaintiffs-respondents-appellants shall recover of defendant-appellant $60 costs and disbursements of this appeal. On the record before us, there was sufficient evidence adduced to support the jury’s verdict in favor of plaintiffs against the defendant Mitchell Altman under the Colorado guest statute. (Colo. Rev. Stat., § 13-9-1 [1968].) We have considered the other points raised hereon and find them without merit. Concur—Stevens, P. J., Murphy, Lane, Nunez and Lynch, JJ.

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

On remand from the Court of Appeals for a review of the facts, judgment, Supreme Court, New York County, entered on October 28, 1974, unanimously af[662] firmed. Plaintiffs-respondents-appellants shall recover of defendant-appellant $60 costs and disbursements of this appeal. On the record before us, there was sufficient evidence adduced to support the jury’s verdict in favor of plaintiffs against the defendant Mitchell Altman under the Colorado guest statute. (Colo. Rev. Stat., § 13-9-1 [1968].) We have considered the other points raised hereon and find them without merit. Concur—Stevens, P. J., Murphy, Lane, Nunez and Lynch, JJ.

Towley v. King Arthur Rings, Inc., 54 A.D.2d 661, 387 N.Y.S.2d 993, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14189 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

54 A.D.2d 661 (Towley v. King Arthur Rings, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.