Legal Opinion

Canfield v. Giles

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

Decided April 24, 1992No. Appeal No. 1Published

1Opinion of the Court

Judgment affirmed without costs. Memorandum: There is no merit to plaintiffs’ contention that they were entitled to a directed verdict as a matter of law, or that the verdict for defendant should be set aside.

Evidence of skidding is only prima facie evidence of negligence and such proof, together with the explanation given by the driver, presents a factual question for the jury (Vadala v Carroll, 91 AD2d 865, affd 59 NY2d 751). Further, defendant’s guilty plea does not establish negligence. A person who pleads guilty to a traffic offense is permitted to explain the reasons for the plea, and…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Ando v.WoodberryNew York Court of Appeals · 1960
  2. Vadala v. CarrollNew York Court of Appeals · 1983
  3. Vadala v. CarrollAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1982
  4. Canfield v. GilesAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992
  5. Jensen v. CasaleAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1964

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API