Twyman v. Anderson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Twyman v. Anderson

234 A.D. 622

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

DecidedJuly 15, 1931

StatusPublished

This text of 234 A.D. 622 (Twyman v. Anderson) 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

Twyman v. Anderson, 234 A.D. 622 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1931).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment affirmed, with costs. No opinion. Young, Kapper, Scudder and Tompkins, JJ., concur; Lazansky, P. J., dissents and votes for reversal and a new trial, with the following memorandum: The ease was submitted to the jury on the theory that it was the duty of plaintiff in the exercise of reasonable care to look and observe, at reasonable intervals while working in the highway, as to whether or not there were approaching vehicles. There is no proof that plaintiff looked and observed as required pursuant to the court’s charge.

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

Judgment affirmed, with costs. No opinion. Young, Kapper, Scudder and Tompkins, JJ., concur; Lazansky, P. J., dissents and votes for reversal and a new trial, with the following memorandum: The ease was submitted to the jury on the theory that it was the duty of plaintiff in the exercise of reasonable care to look and observe, at reasonable intervals while working in the highway, as to whether or not there were approaching vehicles. There is no proof that plaintiff looked and observed as required pursuant to the court’s charge.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

234 A.D. 622, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/twyman-v-anderson-nyappdiv-1931.