Wahrhaftig v. Berberich

259 A.D. 1114, 21 N.Y.S.2d 364, 1940 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8170

This text of 259 A.D. 1114 (Wahrhaftig v. Berberich) 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
Wahrhaftig v. Berberich, 259 A.D. 1114, 21 N.Y.S.2d 364, 1940 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8170 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1940).

Opinion

Plaintiff appeals from an order directing the dismissal of his complaint, following the disagreement of the jury The complaint was dismissed upon the ground that under the authority of Hudson v. Church of Holy Trinity (250 N. Y. 513) plaintiff’s testimony shows him to be guilty of contributory negligence as a matter of law. This court feels that under the authority of Hyde v. Maison Hortense, Inc. (252 N. Y. 534) a question of fact is presented as to contributory negligence. Order and judgment reversed, on the law, with costs to abide the event, and a new trial granted. Hill, P. J., Crapser, Bliss and Heffernan, JJ., concur; Schenek, J., dissents, upon the authority of Hudson v. Church of Holy Trinity (250 N. Y. 513).

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

Related

Hyde v. Maison Hortense, Inc.
170 N.E. 133 (New York Court of Appeals, 1929)
Hudson v. Church of the Holy Trinity
166 N.E. 306 (New York Court of Appeals, 1929)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
259 A.D. 1114, 21 N.Y.S.2d 364, 1940 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8170, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wahrhaftig-v-berberich-nyappdiv-1940.