1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. Misc.2d
  4. 61 Misc.2d
  5. 61 Misc.2d 591 (1969)
 

TONER v. ARNOLD CONSTABLE

61 Misc.2d 591 (1969)

Mary D. Toner, Respondent, v. Arnold Constable et al., Defendants, and Sophia Beauty Salons, Inc., Defendant-Appellant and Third-Party Plaintiff-Appellant. Ozon Products, Inc., Third-Party Defendant-Respondent.

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department.

December 11, 1969

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Mele & Cullen (Henry J. Smith and Neil S. Davis of counsel), for appellant. Edward Kurland and Stephen G. Winn for respondent.

Concur — STREIT, J. P., QUINN and HOFSTADTER, JJ.

Per Curiam.

We believe it was a proper exercise of discretion, in setting aside the verdict in plaintiff's favor, to order a new trial rather than dismiss the complaint, and thus afford plaintiff "the opportunity — to demonstrate the causal connection between the negligence found and the injury sustained." This was the course adopted in Ravo v. Lido (17 A.D.2d 476). Since, however, the liability of defendant...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

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.

Citing Cases