Legal Opinion · Dissent

Potaznick v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided May 27, 1982Published

1Dissent

Murphy, P. J., and Ross, J.,

dissent in a memorandum by Ross, J., as

follows: The jury instructions as rendered by the trial court were adequate under the circumstances and conveyed to the triers of fact the appropriate standards to be applied. When viewing the charge as a whole, it sufficiently instructs the jury that the applicable test to be employed is the “reasonable prudent man” standard. As the majority of this court notes, the plaintiff failed to object to these instructions nor did she request a charge on “momentary forgetfulness”. However, the trial court did inform the jury that this…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Marton v. McCaslandAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1962
  2. Gross v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1965
  3. Flynn v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1970
  4. Flynn v. Poirier & McLane Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1971
  5. Gross v. City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1966

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API