From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hertz v. Montlack

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 19, 1965
24 A.D.2d 626 (N.Y. App. Div. 1965)

Opinion

July 19, 1965


In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injury, the plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, entered November 23, 1964 after a jury trial, upon the court's decision, in favor of the defendants, dismissing the complaint as a matter of law at the end of plaintiff's case. Judgment reversed on the law and a new trial granted, with costs to plaintiff to abide the event. No issues of fact were considered. In our opinion, under the circumstances here, jury questions were presented as to defendants' negligence and plaintiff's freedom from contributory negligence ( Axelrod v. Krupinski, 302 N.Y. 367; Faso v. City of New York, 18 A.D.2d 1005). Plaintiff having made out a prima facie case, it was error to dismiss the complaint as a matter of law. Beldock, P.J., Ughetta, Christ, Brennan and Hopkins, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Hertz v. Montlack

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 19, 1965
24 A.D.2d 626 (N.Y. App. Div. 1965)
Case details for

Hertz v. Montlack

Case Details

Full title:GEORGE HERTZ, Appellant, v. HOWARD MONTLACK et al., Doing Business as…

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

Date published: Jul 19, 1965

Citations

24 A.D.2d 626 (N.Y. App. Div. 1965)

Citing Cases

Rees v. Grandelli

ubted rule that an unexcused violation of a statute may be negligence ( Martin v. Herzog, 228 N.Y. 164), but…