From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Butensky v. Goldberg

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 1, 1933
240 App. Div. 892 (N.Y. App. Div. 1933)

Opinion

November, 1933.


Judgment reversed on the law and a new trial granted, costs to appellant to abide the event. There was a question of fact as to the negligence of defendant. ( Greenley v. Miller's, Incorporated, 111 Conn. 584.) Lazansky, P.J., Carswell and Davis, JJ., concur; Kapper and Hagarty, JJ., dissent and vote to affirm. ( Wein v. Woolworth Co., 223 App. Div. 794; Woolworth Co. v. Conboy, 170 Fed. 934; Lord v. Sherer Dry Goods Co., 205 Mass. 1.)


Summaries of

Butensky v. Goldberg

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 1, 1933
240 App. Div. 892 (N.Y. App. Div. 1933)
Case details for

Butensky v. Goldberg

Case Details

Full title:SARAH BUTENSKY, Appellant, v. HERMAN D. GOLDBERG, Respondent

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

Date published: Nov 1, 1933

Citations

240 App. Div. 892 (N.Y. App. Div. 1933)