AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes

EVA BARRETT, Appellant-Respondent, v. ROY PERKINS, Appellant, and ANN FRULLA et al., Respondents. (Action No. 1.) EVA BARRETT, as Administratrix of the Estate of LEWIS D. BARRETT, Deceased, Appellant-Respondent,

The foregoing negligence actions were tried at a Trial Term of the Supreme Court, Warren County. In action No. 1 the jury rendered a verdict of $5,000 in favor of the plaintiff Eva Barrett and against the defendant Roy Perkins; and a verdict of no cause in favor of the defendants Ann Frulla and Libro Frulla. In action No. 2 the jury returned a verdict of $5,000 in favor of Eva Barrett, as administratrix, etc., and against the defendant Roy Perkins; and a verdict of no cause in favor of the defendants Frulla. The defendant Perkins appealed from the judgments entered against him, but filed no brief. Plaintiff in each case appealed from that part of the judgment which dismissed the complaint against the defendants Frulla. The individual plaintiff and her deceased husband were riding in a horse-drawn vehicle along the edge of a public highway leading from Warrensburg, New York, to Lake George, New York, The vehicle in which they were riding was struck in some manner by an automobile driven by the defendant Perkins, and as a result of this collision plaintiff and her husband were thrown out into the highway. It was claimed by the plaintiff in each case that the Frulla car, driven at the time by the respondent Ann Frulla, was operated in a negligent manner so as to injure the plaintiff Eva Barrett and cause the death of her husband as they lay in the highway following the first collision. The jury found to the contrary, and we do not find that its verdict in either case was against the weight of evidence. Nor do we find any errors committed on the trial which require a reversal of either judgment. Judgments unanimously affirmed. The plaintiffs in actions Nos. 1 and 2 may have one bill of costs against the defendant-appellant Perkins; insofar as the judgments of no cause of action are concerned no costs are allowed as against the plaintiffs.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

BARRETT v. PERKINS
(May 4, 1949)