Wirth v. De Vito

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Wirth v. De Vito

89 A.D.2d 603, 452 N.Y.S.2d 463, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 17691

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

DecidedJuly 19, 1982

StatusPublished

This text of 89 A.D.2d 603 (Wirth v. De Vito) 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

Wirth v. De Vito, 89 A.D.2d 603, 452 N.Y.S.2d 463, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 17691 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1982).

Pincite

Opinion

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., plaintiffs appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Beisheim, J.), entered October 9, 1980, which was in favor of the defendant, upon a jury verdict. Judgment reversed, on the law, and new trial granted, with costs to abide the event. The Trial Judge committed reversible error by refusing to charge the jury that defendant could be found liable on the alternate theories of creation of a hazardous condition or the failure to warn of the existence, of certain potentially dangerous conditions (cf. Cook v Rezende, 32 NY2d 596; McCabe v Mackay, 253 NY 440). Mollen, P. J., Titone and Rubin, JJ., concur; Weinstein, J., dissents and votes to affirm the judgment.

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

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., plaintiffs appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Beisheim, J.), entered October 9, 1980, which was in favor of the defendant, upon a jury verdict. Judgment reversed, on the law, and new trial granted, with costs to abide the event. The Trial Judge committed reversible error by refusing to charge the jury that defendant could be found liable on the alternate theories of creation of a hazardous condition or the failure to warn of the existence, of certain potentially dangerous conditions (cf. Cook v Rezende, 32 NY2d 596; McCabe v Mackay, 253 NY 440). Mollen, P. J., Titone and Rubin, JJ., concur; Weinstein, J., dissents and votes to affirm the judgment.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

89 A.D.2d 603, 452 N.Y.S.2d 463, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 17691, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wirth-v-de-vito-nyappdiv-1982.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack