Hamby v. Bonventre

*649Herlihy, P. J., G-reenblott and Sweeney, JJ., concur; Cooke, J., concurs in the following memorandum: I concur solely on the ground that the introduction of evidence, over objection, as to Hamby’s violation of the college rule was incompetent and so prejudicial as to require reversal. Reynolds, J., dissents, and votes to affirm, in the following memorandum: I cannot agree with the reversal in this case. This was an intelligent verdict by this jury in allowing the passenger Pattee to recover against both defendants. I agree with plaintiff Pattee that it should be affirmed. Hamby admits that…