From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rosenberg v. Lorraine Manor, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 1, 1963
19 A.D.2d 733 (N.Y. App. Div. 1963)

Opinion

July 1, 1963


In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injury, plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, entered May 29, 1961 after trial, upon a jury's verdict in favor of the defendants. Judgment affirmed, with costs. By stipulation of the parties set forth in the record, the appeal has been limited to the question of whether it was reversible error for the trial court to refuse to grant two requests to charge with respect to the violation of rule 2.16.13 of the Rules of the Board of Standards and Appeals of the City of New York. Neither rule 2.16.13 nor any other specific rule of the said board was asserted in plaintiff's complaint or in his bill of particulars; nor was any such rule invoked at any time during the trial until the requests to charge were made. Nor was any specific provision of statute asserted until, on the argument of a motion to dismiss, reliance was placed on section 200 Lab. of the Labor Law. The record discloses that reference to said section was included in the charge to the jury, with appropriate explanation. Ughetta, Acting P.J., Kleinfeld, Christ, Brennan and Rabin, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Rosenberg v. Lorraine Manor, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 1, 1963
19 A.D.2d 733 (N.Y. App. Div. 1963)
Case details for

Rosenberg v. Lorraine Manor, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:MORRIS ROSENBERG, Appellant, v. LORRAINE MANOR, INC., et al., Respondents

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

Date published: Jul 1, 1963

Citations

19 A.D.2d 733 (N.Y. App. Div. 1963)

Citing Cases

Meenan Oil Co. v. L.I. Light. Co.

The contention that section 65 Pub. Serv. of the Public Service Law was violated was one which could properly…