From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Curatolo v. Rochester Ice Cold Storage Utilities

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Nov 16, 1938
255 App. Div. 934 (N.Y. App. Div. 1938)

Opinion

November 16, 1938.

Present — Sears, P.J., Crosby, Cunningham, Taylor and Dowling, JJ.


Judgment and order reversed on the facts and a new trial granted, with costs to the appellants to abide the event, unless the plaintiffs shall, within ten days, stipulate to reduce the verdict to the sum of $8,000, as of the date of the rendition thereof, in which event the judgment is modified accordingly and, as so modified, is, together with the order, affirmed, without costs of this appeal to either party. Memorandum: We find no error in the exclusion, by the trial court, of the Rochester city ordinance. Failure to obey the ordinance, even if it could be charged to the decedent, was not, in any sense, the proximate cause of the accident. It is also doubtful whether the ordinance refers to the kind of act in which the decedent was engaged. We find, however, that the verdict was excessive, considering decedent's age and his ability to produce an income. All concur. (The judgment is for plaintiffs in an automobile negligence action. The order denies a motion for a new trial.)


Summaries of

Curatolo v. Rochester Ice Cold Storage Utilities

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Nov 16, 1938
255 App. Div. 934 (N.Y. App. Div. 1938)
Case details for

Curatolo v. Rochester Ice Cold Storage Utilities

Case Details

Full title:ROSE CURATOLO and Another, as Administratrices, etc., of ANGELO CURATOLO…

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

Date published: Nov 16, 1938

Citations

255 App. Div. 934 (N.Y. App. Div. 1938)