Opinion · Nylaw New York

LEVACK v. BROOKLYN AND QUEENS TRANSIT CORPORATION, 259 App. Div. 1089 (1940)

ETHEL LEVACK & MICHAEL LEVACK, as Adm’r, Adm’xs, etc., of SAMUEL LEVACK,Deceased, Respondents, v. BROOKLYN & QUEENS TRANSIT CORPORATION,Appellant., 259 A.D. 1089 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department. 1940)

Type: Opinion
Court: Nylaw New York
Jurisdiction: Nylaw
Date: 1940-07-02
Topic: general

LEVACK v. BROOKLYN AND QUEENS TRANSIT CORPORATION, 259 App. Div. 1089 (1940) ETHEL LEVACK and MICHAEL LEVACK, as Administrators, etc., of SAMUEL LEVACK,Deceased, Respondents, v. BROOKLYN AND QUEENS TRANSIT CORPORATION,Appellant.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department. July 2, 1940.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed LEVACK v. BROOKLYN AND QUEENS TRANSIT CORPORATION, 259 App. Div. 1089 (1940). The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

LEVACK v. BROOKLYN AND QUEENS TRANSIT CORPORATION,259 App. Div. 1089(1940)

ETHEL LEVACK and MICHAEL LEVACK, as Administrators, etc., of SAMUEL LEVACK,

Deceased, Respondents, v. BROOKLYN AND QUEENS TRANSIT CORPORATION,

Appellant.

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

July 2, 1940.

On appeal by defendant, in an action for damages for death by wrongful act, neglect or default, from a judgment in favor of plaintiffs, entered on a jury verdict, judgment reversed on the facts and a new trial granted, with costs to appellant to abide the event, on the ground that the verdict is against the weight of the evidence. Johnston, Adel and Taylor, JJ., concur; Lazansky, P.J., and Carswell, J., dissent and vote to affirm the judgment.