Legal Opinion

Hoffman v. Grobsmith

New York Supreme Court

Decided March 15, 1927PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWilliam F. Dowling, J.

The above actions were simultaneously brought against the above defendants to recover damages arising out of an automobile collision wherein the plaintiffs suffered both property damages and personal injuries. There was no privity between the plaintiffs in said causes. The actions were duly placed upon the calendar of a Trial Term held at Utica in January, 1927. By direction of the trial justice the said three cases were tried together before a jury. (The cases were not consolidated.) The jury awarded each plaintiff substantial damages. If the cases had been tried before separate juries, each…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Parker v. City of New YorkNew York Supreme Court · 1924
  2. Clark v. MacDonaldNew York Supreme Court · 1891
  3. Hinman v. BoothNew York Supreme Court · 1839

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Brown v. CohanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1938
  2. Canners Exchange Subscribers at Warners Inter-Insurance Bureau v. North American Canning Co.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1952
  3. Hamelik v. Sypek, New York County Courts1934
  4. Benjamin v. WalchNew York Supreme Court · 1936
  5. Canners Exchange Subscribers at Warners Inter-Insurance Bureau v. North American Canning Co. (Two Cases). Warner Reciprocal Insurers v. North American Canning CoCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1952

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

Powered by the Exa API