Cochrane v. Fahey
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Per curiam
That defendants were guilty of negligence is not proved by such an overwhelming weight of evidence that we can overlook the prejudice that might have been caused in the minds of the jury by plaintiff’s counsel asking three of defendants’ witnesses, who were riding in the same car with plaintiff, if they had not settled their causes of action for injuries growing out of the same accident which is the basis of plaintiff’s action. Only one was permitted to state the amount he received in settlement but the other two *42stated that they had settled. To be sure, the trial court instructed the jury…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Keet v. MurrinNew York Court of Appeals · 1932
3Cited by7 opinions
- Esser v. BropheySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1942
- Cataldo v. County of MonroeNew York Supreme Court · 1963
- Bigelow-Sanford, Inc. v. Specialized Commercial Floors of Rochester, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1980
- Gilliam v. LeeAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1969
- Schenker v. BourneAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1951
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.