Legal Opinion

Zemliansky v. United Parcel Service, Inc.

New York Supreme Court

Decided December 18, 1940PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWalter, J.

The evidence is sufficient to present questions of fact with respect to defendant’s negligence and plaintiff’s freedom from contributory negligence. The motion to direct a verdict, upon which I reserved decision, is, therefore, denied. The jury’s verdict nevertheless must be set aside because of improper conduct of plaintiffs’ counsel.

The object of summation is to give counsel an opportunity to comment upon the evidence, and within reasonable limitations that includes the right to comment upon those who give the evidence, but to say of a physician of standing who has testified as to his…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Cherry Creek National Bank v. Fidelity & Casualty Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1924
  2. Mott v. Detroit, Grand Haven & Milwaukee Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1899
  3. State v. BrunetteNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1914
  4. Galveston, Harrisburg & San Antonio Railway Co. v. WashingtonCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1906
  5. Texas & Pacific Railway Co. v. ReaCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1901

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Clark v. Johnson Bros. ConstructionCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1985
  2. Freeman v. Manhattan Cab Corp.New York Supreme Court · 1956
  3. United States v. Certain Lands in Town of HighlandsDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1942

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

Powered by the Exa API