Civil Procedure · MBE-tested

Margaret E. Dunn, Respondent, v. The Prudential Insurance Company of America, Appellant

239 A.D. 866·New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division·1933·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

Margaret E. Dunn, Respondent, v. The Prudential Insurance Company of America, Appellant. [MAJORITY] Judgment, in so far as it allows recovery on the $800 policy, set forth in the fourth cause of action, reversed, on the law, and such cause of action dismissed, with costs to the respondent against the appellant, on the ground that there was no evidence of a visible wound or contusion; in all other respects the judgment and order are affirmed. Hill, P. J., Rhodes and Crapser, JJ., concur; Bliss, J., concurs in the reversal as to the recovery on the $800 policy, set forth in the fourth paragraph of the complaint, and votes to reverse and dismiss as to the recoveries had in the other four causes of action.