Legal Opinion

Mitchell v. Shoals, Inc.

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

Decided June 14, 1966PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtStevens, J.

The facts are fairly stated in the dissent, so will not be repeated at length. The testimony of the plaintiff— while, perhaps, susceptible to an inference of further drinks, after her fifth drink — is limited by her statement, “ Nothing that I know of ” in response to the question “ [ajfter the fifth one, what did you have to drink? ” All of the testimony is agreed that plaintiff fell asleep at the table in the cafe, and that she was removed, still sleeping, and placed in the Taylor car. There is no testimony or claim that plaintiff at any time purchased or paid for the drinks consumed by any…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Mead v. . StrattonNew York Court of Appeals · 1882
  2. James v. WickerAppellate Court of Illinois · 1941
  3. Tyrrell v. QuigleyNew York Supreme Court · 1946
  4. Kinney v. 1809 Forest Ave. Inc.New York Supreme Court · 1957

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Anderson v. ComardoNew York Supreme Court · 1981
  2. Herrick v. Second Cuthouse, Ltd.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1984
  3. Smith v. GuliAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1985
  4. Weinheimer v. HoffmanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1983
  5. Fox v. MercerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1985

5 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