Opinion · Nylaw New York

WITTENBERG v. WITTENBERG, 243 App. Div. 820 (1935)

MARCIA WITTENBERG, Respondent, v. WILLIAM WITTENBERG, Appellant., 243 A.D. 820 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department. 1935)

Type: Opinion
Court: Nylaw New York
Jurisdiction: Nylaw
Date: 1935-01-01
Topic: general

WITTENBERG v. WITTENBERG, 243 App. Div. 820 (1935) MARCIA WITTENBERG, Respondent, v. WILLIAM WITTENBERG, Appellant.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department. March, 1935.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed WITTENBERG v. WITTENBERG, 243 App. Div. 820 (1935). The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

WITTENBERG v. WITTENBERG,243 App. Div. 820(1935)

MARCIA WITTENBERG, Respondent, v. WILLIAM WITTENBERG, Appellant.

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

March, 1935.

Plaintiff was a guest in defendant's automobile, which was traveling northerly along the viaduct at the Grand Central Terminal in Manhattan and through the tunnel approaching Forty-fifth street. Defendant, who was driving, testified that a car in the rear was attempting to pass on his left and that he turned to the right "too fast" and ran into the wall, as the result of which the plaintiff was injured. Judgment unanimously affirmed, with costs. In our opinion, the jury was justified in finding negligence on the part of the defendant regardless of the doctrine ofres ipsa loquitur.

Present — Lazansky, P.J., Hagarty, Scudder, Tompkins and Davis, JJ.Page 821