Delgado v. Board of Education of Union Free School District No. 1

N.Y. App. Div.

Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division

Citations: 65 A.D.2d 547, 408 N.Y.S.2d 949, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13173

Decision Date: 10/2/1978

Jurisdiction: NY

Bluebook Citation: Delgado v. Board of Education of Union Free School District No. 1, 65 A.D.2d 547, 408 N.Y.S.2d 949, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13173 (N.Y. App. Div. 1978)

More Cases: N.Y. App. Div. decisions from 1978


Citation analytics

How this case sits in the citation network, derived from CiteLaw's graph of published opinions.

★Highly CitedTop 4% most-cited · cited by 70 decisions
70
Citing decisions
4
Courts citing

Citations by decade

14
37
17
1
1
1980s1990s2000s2010s2020s

Courts citing this case

N.Y. App. Div.67
N.Y.1
N.Y. Sup. Ct.1
N.Y. Sup. Ct., New York Cty.1
Most recently cited by10
  • 2024Weinhardt v. New York City Tr. Auth. N.Y. Sup. Ct., New York Cty.
  • 2010Luftman v. Fashion 21, Inc. N.Y. Sup. Ct.
  • 2006Seeley v. Dallao Restaurant, Doing Business as Horseblock Inn N.Y. App. Div.
  • 2006Dicke v. Anci N.Y. App. Div.
  • 2006Tagliaferro v. Durgin N.Y. App. Div.
  • 2006Taylor v. Martorella N.Y. App. Div.
  • 2005Campbell v. City of Glen Cove N.Y. App. Div.
  • 2005Yondola v. Trabulsy N.Y. App. Div.
  • 2004McIntosh v. City of New York N.Y. App. Div.
  • 2004Williams v. Pelican Pest Control, Inc. N.Y. App. Div.

Counts reflect decisions in the CiteLaw corpus and may lag very recent opinions.


Opinion

Pedro V. Delgado, an Infant by His Parent and Natural Guardian Pedro Delgado, et al., Respondents, v Board of Education of Union Free School District No. 1 of the Towns of Greenburgh and Mt. Pleasant, Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff-Appellant. Board of Education of Mt. Pleasant Central School District, Thornwood, Third-Party Defendant-Appellant.

majority

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., defendant and third-party defendant appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, entered December 13, 1977, which granted plaintiffs’ motion (1) to set aside the jury verdict and (2) for a new trial. Order reversed, without costs or disbursements, plaintiffs’ motion denied, jury verdict reinstated and action remitted to Trial Term for the entry of an appropriate judgment. The trial court erred in setting aside the jury verdict and in ordering a new trial. The evidence presented questions of fact as to the negligence of the appellants. It cannot be said that the jury could not have reached its verdict on any fair interpretation of the evidence (see Scholar v Roland, 36 AD2d 732; Collins v City of New York, 263 App Div 893). Damiani, J. P., Suozzi, Shapiro and Cohalan, JJ., concur.

Chat with this case using AI

Ask CiteLaw's AI Navigator anything about this case, check whether it is still good law, and see every case that cites it. Sign up for CiteLaw free today to get started.