Appellant's contention that the verdict was excessive constitutes the only issue presented by the appeal. Plaintiff's ophthalmologist found a chemical conjunctivitis of both eyes which he termed very severe; but after three months treatment the inflammation was completely healed and at the time of the trial, some four years later, the doctor was unable, in the absence of re-examination, to testify to any permanency. Plaintiff drove
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Let's get started
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
BARR v. HENNEL
16 A.D.2d 1011 (1962)
Bernard B. Barr, Respondent, v. Edmund Hennel, Doing Business as Hennel's Service Station, Appellant
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Third Department.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
June 21, 1962
June 21, 1962
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Third Department.
Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.
Cited Cases
- No Cases Found
Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.
