Legal Opinion

Capasso v. Square Sanitarium, Inc.

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

Decided May 17, 1955PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Per curiam

The agreed statement of facts gives rise to conflicting inferences with respect to some aspects of the case, thus making it inadvisable to grant judgment to either party on the statement as submitted. The parties agree that "The vaporizer required no supervision during operation”. Different inferences may be drawn from that statement; i.e., that it required no supervision with respect to the mechanics of its operation or that it required no supervision during its operation with respect to its proximity to the patient. We may not draw either inference. Likewise there is no indication as to the…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Graham v. East 88th Street Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1953

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Appleton v. Merchants Mutual InsuranceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1962

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

Powered by the Exa API