Warnock v. Monje

279 A.D. 842, 109 N.Y.S.2d 530
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJanuary 16, 1952
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 279 A.D. 842 (Warnock v. Monje) 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
Warnock v. Monje, 279 A.D. 842, 109 N.Y.S.2d 530 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1952).

Opinion

Memorandum: The recital by the defendant as to how the accident happened if made by him, (as we understand it was from this confused record) was properly received in evidence as an admission. (Richardson on Evidence [6th ed.], § 357, p. 291; Reed v. McCord, 160 N. Y. 330.) The probative value of the defendant’s recital was for the determination of the jury. (Gangi v. Fradus, 227 N. Y. 452, 457.) We think that the statement of the defendant, together with the other evidence presented, required that the question of negligence or freedom from negligence on the part of the defendant be submitted for the determination of the jury. All concur. (Appeal from a judgment dismissing the complaint in a negligence action.) Present — Taylor, P. J., Vaughan, Kimball, Piper and Wheeler, JJ.

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

Related

Katz v. Midtown Ticket Agency, Inc.
26 Misc. 2d 66 (New York Supreme Court, 1960)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
279 A.D. 842, 109 N.Y.S.2d 530, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/warnock-v-monje-nyappdiv-1952.