AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
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
Attorney(S)

JOSEPHINE DE PINTO, as Administratrix of the Estate of MAURO DE PINTO, Deceased, Respondent, v. O'DONNELL TRANSPORTATION CO., INC., Appellant, et al., Defendants.

Per Curiam.

The evidence amply supports the finding by the jury that there was negligence on the part of the defendant-appellant and freedom from contributory negligence on the part of the deceased. Upon consideration of the Federal statutes (U.S. Rev. Stat., §§ 4283, 4284, 4285; U.S. Code, tit. 46, §§ 183, 184 and 185, as amd. by Act of June 5, 1936, ch. 521 [49 U.S. Stat. 1479 et seq.]), we agree with the interpretation in The Chickie ( 141 F.2d 80), and, accordingly, under section 606 of the Civil Practice Act (as amd. by L. 1942, ch. 297), the judgment is reversed and the case is remitted to the Appellate Division, without costs, for determination upon the questions of fact, including discretion, raised in that court by the defendant-appellant's motion to amend the answer.

The judgment of the Appellate Division should be reversed, without costs, and the case remitted to the Appellate Division for determination upon the questions of fact, including discretion, raised in that court by the defendant-appellant's motion to amend the answer.

LEHMAN, Ch. J., LOUGHRAN, RIPPEY, LEWIS, CONWAY, DESMOND and THACHER, JJ., concur.

Judgment accordingly.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

DE PINTO v. O'DONNELL TRANSPORTATION CO
(May 25, 1944)