Trembacz v. Davis

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Trembacz v. Davis

24 A.D.2d 1040, 265 N.Y.S.2d 621, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2759

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

DecidedDecember 20, 1965

StatusPublished

This text of 24 A.D.2d 1040 (Trembacz v. Davis) 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

Trembacz v. Davis, 24 A.D.2d 1040, 265 N.Y.S.2d 621, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2759 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

Hamm, J.

Appeal from a judgment entered on a jury verdict of no cause of action. The plaintiff, a pedestrian, was struck by an automobile. The evidence was such that the issues of the negligence of the operator of the automobile and of the contributory negligence of the plaintiff were required to be submitted to the jury. The case was submitted to the jury in a charge to which no exception was taken. The court’s further instructions in response to the plaintiff’s requests to charge and to an inquiry and request by the jury were likewise given without exception. No such error is demonstrated as to lead us to disregard the usual requirement that an exception be taken to an allegedly erroneous charge. Judgment affirmed, without costs. Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Reynolds and Aulisi, JJ., concur.

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

Hamm, J.

Appeal from a judgment entered on a jury verdict of no cause of action. The plaintiff, a pedestrian, was struck by an automobile. The evidence was such that the issues of the negligence of the operator of the automobile and of the contributory negligence of the plaintiff were required to be submitted to the jury. The case was submitted to the jury in a charge to which no exception was taken. The court’s further instructions in response to the plaintiff’s requests to charge and to an inquiry and request by the jury were likewise given without exception. No such error is demonstrated as to lead us to disregard the usual requirement that an exception be taken to an allegedly erroneous charge. Judgment affirmed, without costs. Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Reynolds and Aulisi, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

24 A.D.2d 1040, 265 N.Y.S.2d 621, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2759, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/trembacz-v-davis-nyappdiv-1965.