From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mantione v. Picone

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
May 5, 1948
273 App. Div. 1049 (N.Y. App. Div. 1948)

Opinion

May 5, 1948.

Present — Taylor, P.J., McCurn, Love, Vaughan and Kimball, JJ.


Judgment affirmed, with costs. Memorandum: There was ample evidence from which the jury could find that the defendant's car was being operated at a speed of at least forty-five miles an hour, and had been so operated for more than one-quarter of a mile. Such operation was prohibited by the statute then in effect. (Vehicle and Traffic Law, § 56, subd. 3, as amd. by L. 1945, ch. 210, eff. March 21, 1945.) This was negligence ( Martin v. Herzog, 228 N.Y. 164, 168; Homin v. Cleveland Whitehill Co., 281 N.Y. 484) which, considered in connection with the blowout, and the number of times which the car turned over after the blowout, supports the finding of the jury that plaintiff's injuries were proximately caused by defendant's negligence. All concur. (The judgment is for plaintiff and against defendant Picone, and by direction of the court, in favor of defendant Picone over against defendant Mantione for the same amount, in an automobile negligence action.)


Summaries of

Mantione v. Picone

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
May 5, 1948
273 App. Div. 1049 (N.Y. App. Div. 1948)
Case details for

Mantione v. Picone

Case Details

Full title:MADELINE MANTIONE, Respondent, v. CHARLES PICONE, Defendant and Third…

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

Date published: May 5, 1948

Citations

273 App. Div. 1049 (N.Y. App. Div. 1948)

Citing Cases

Vener v. Musler

As so modified, order unanimously affirmed, without costs. The skid of the car does not warrant application…