From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Arney v. Kramer

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 25, 1948
274 App. Div. 903 (N.Y. App. Div. 1948)

Opinion

October 25, 1948.

Present — Johnston, Acting P.J., Adel, Nolan, Sneed and Wenzel, JJ.


In an action to recover damages for personal injuries suffered by respondent Cora Arney, and for expenses and loss of services by respondent, Howard Arney, judgment in favor of respondents unanimously affirmed under section 106 of the Civil Practice Act, with costs. Although this court does not approve of unnecessary controversies between trial court and counsel, the instances of alleged prejudicial statements and comments asserted by appellants were occasioned by counsel's own attitude and conduct. Neither such instances, nor the exclusion of respondent Cora Arney's statement upon her application for an automobile operator's license, nor the questioned arguments to the jury in summation for respondents did, in our opinion, affect a substantial right of appellants.


Summaries of

Arney v. Kramer

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 25, 1948
274 App. Div. 903 (N.Y. App. Div. 1948)
Case details for

Arney v. Kramer

Case Details

Full title:CORA ARNEY et al., Respondents, v. MILDRED KRAMER et al., Appellants

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Oct 25, 1948

Citations

274 App. Div. 903 (N.Y. App. Div. 1948)

Citing Cases

Posner v. Empire Trust Company

The comments and statements of the trial court which appellant claims to have been prejudicial were…