From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Burickson v. Hahn's Boardwalk Baths, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 1, 1933
240 App. Div. 972 (N.Y. App. Div. 1933)

Opinion

December, 1933.


Order setting aside verdict on the ground that it was not unanimous reversed on the law, with costs, motion denied, without costs, verdict reinstated and judgment directed to be entered thereon. The record discloses that the verdict was unanimous. The examination of juror number 9 concluded with a declaration that the verdict as read was his verdict. That which he stated prior to that declaration was merely an explanation of how he came to agree upon the verdict. It did not constitute a declaration that he did not now agree to the verdict or that he refused to abide by it and desired to change his vote. The case of Spielter v. North German Lloyd Steamship Co. ( 232 App. Div. 104) is distinguishable and is not a controlling authority to the contrary of the decision here made. Lazansky, P.J., Kapper, Carswell, Tompkins and Davis, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Burickson v. Hahn's Boardwalk Baths, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 1, 1933
240 App. Div. 972 (N.Y. App. Div. 1933)
Case details for

Burickson v. Hahn's Boardwalk Baths, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:YETTA BURICKSON and HARRY BURICKSON, Appellants, v. HAHN'S BOARDWALK…

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

Date published: Dec 1, 1933

Citations

240 App. Div. 972 (N.Y. App. Div. 1933)