Wallach v. Goldstein

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Wallach v. Goldstein

1 A.D.2d 768, 149 N.Y.S.2d 207, 1956 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6585

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

DecidedJanuary 24, 1956

StatusPublished

This text of 1 A.D.2d 768 (Wallach v. Goldstein) 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

Wallach v. Goldstein, 1 A.D.2d 768, 149 N.Y.S.2d 207, 1956 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6585 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1956).

Pincite

Opinion

In view of the equivocal testimony given by plaintiffs’ medical expert and the inconclusive nature of the remaining evidence adduced by plaintiffs, the Trial Justice properly set aside the verdict of the jury in favor of plaintiffs. Implicit in the jury’s verdict must have been findings that defendant had been guilty of medical malpractice and that such malpractice was a competent producing cause of decedent’s death. A verdict necessarily based upon such findings was against the weight of the credible evidence. However, there was not such a defect of proof as to warrant directing a verdict in favor of defendant. Accordingly, the judgment in favor of defendant is unanimously reversed and a new trial ordered, with costs to the appellants to abide the event. Settle order on notice. Concur — Peck, P. J., Breitel, Botein, Frank and Bergan, JJ.

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

In view of the equivocal testimony given by plaintiffs’ medical expert and the inconclusive nature of the remaining evidence adduced by plaintiffs, the Trial Justice properly set aside the verdict of the jury in favor of plaintiffs. Implicit in the jury’s verdict must have been findings that defendant had been guilty of medical malpractice and that such malpractice was a competent producing cause of decedent’s death. A verdict necessarily based upon such findings was against the weight of the credible evidence. However, there was not such a defect of proof as to warrant directing a verdict in favor of defendant. Accordingly, the judgment in favor of defendant is unanimously reversed and a new trial ordered, with costs to the appellants to abide the event. Settle order on notice. Concur — Peck, P. J., Breitel, Botein, Frank and Bergan, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 A.D.2d 768, 149 N.Y.S.2d 207, 1956 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6585, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wallach-v-goldstein-nyappdiv-1956.