Torts · MBE-tested
Sarah Teresa Reilly, Respondent, v. Albert Simonson, Appellant
154 A.D. 921·New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division·1913·NY
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
Sarah Teresa Reilly, Respondent, v. Albert Simonson, Appellant.
Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, entered in the New York county clerk’s office on the 8th day of June, 1912, upon a verdict and from an order entered on the 7th day of June, 1912, denying a motion for a new trial.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam:]
Per Curiam:
The judgment and order appealed from are reversed and a new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide the event, on the ground that the evidence does not support the finding of the jury that the defendant was guilty of negligence. Present—Ingraham, P.. J., McLaughlin, Clarke, Scott and Dowling, JJ.; Scott, J., dissented. Judgment and order reversed and new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide event. Order to be settled on notice.