Weiner v. Serps Auto Wreckers, Inc.

248 N.E.2d 601, 24 N.Y.2d 845, 300 N.Y.S.2d 852, 1969 N.Y. LEXIS 1404
CourtNew York Court of Appeals
DecidedApril 10, 1969
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 248 N.E.2d 601 (Weiner v. Serps Auto Wreckers, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Weiner v. Serps Auto Wreckers, Inc., 248 N.E.2d 601, 24 N.Y.2d 845, 300 N.Y.S.2d 852, 1969 N.Y. LEXIS 1404 (N.Y. 1969).

Opinion

Memorandum.

The judgment appealed from should be modified by directing a new trial as to defendant City of New York, with costs to abide the event; and otherwise affirmed, with costs to plaintiffs against defendants Serps Auto Wreckers, Inc. and Simon. The liability of the city depends entirely on the acceptance of defendant Simon’s testimony that a hole in the pavement caused the breaking away of the car he was towing and the consequent injury to plaintiff Stuart Weiner. None of the several statements made by Simon to police immediately after the accident makes any reference to a condition of the road as a factor in the breaking away of the towed car and at least one disclaims a hole in the street as a causative factor. The case is thus a very close one on the city’s liability. The notice of claim, pleading and bill of particulars, placing the purported defective condition of the street some 200 feet away from where plaintiff’s proof on the trial placed it, were misleading to the city in preparation of its defense. Proof of repairs after the accident on the site of the purported defect was inadmissible and did not become so on the basis of a photograph offered by the city of another part of the street, the part specified in the notice of claim. These errors become significant in view of the closeness of the case on the merits of the city’s responsibility.

Chief Judge Fuld and Judges Burke, Scileppi, Bergan, Keating, Breitel and Jasen concur.

Judgment modified by directing a new trial as to defendant City of New York, with costs to abide the event, and, as so modified, affirmed, with costs to plaintiffs against defendants Serps Auto Wreckers, Inc. and Simon in accordance with the memorandum herein.

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

Related

Alfieri v. Carmelite Nursing Home, Inc.
29 Misc. 3d 509 (Civil Court of the City of New York, 2010)
Di Paolo v. Somma
111 A.D.2d 899 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1985)
Caprara v. Chrysler Corp.
71 A.D.2d 515 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1979)
Amabello v. Colonial Motors
374 A.2d 1182 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1977)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
248 N.E.2d 601, 24 N.Y.2d 845, 300 N.Y.S.2d 852, 1969 N.Y. LEXIS 1404, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/weiner-v-serps-auto-wreckers-inc-ny-1969.