Case Name: Jacob Fink, Appellant, v. 37 West 36th Street Company, Respondent, Impleaded with Elias Kaiser, Defendant
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1937-05-28
Citations: 251 A.D. 261
Docket Number: 
Parties: Jacob Fink, Appellant, v. 37 West 36th Street Company, Respondent, Impleaded with Elias Kaiser, Defendant.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 251
Pages: 261–263

Head Matter:
Jacob Fink, Appellant, v. 37 West 36th Street Company, Respondent, Impleaded with Elias Kaiser, Defendant.
First Department,
May 28, 1937.
J. Irving Weissman, for the appellant.
William B. Shelton of counsel [Jenkins, Dimmick & Finnegan, attorneys], for the respondent 37 West 36th Street Company.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
The facts adduced by the plaintiff upon the trial were sufficient to establish a prima facie case, and, consequently, the court should not have dismissed the complaint.
We are in accord, however, with the rulings of the court on the question of insurance and replacement of the glass. While that evidence may be persuasive on the question of control, nevertheless, we do not deem it relevant. While it is true that the trial justice, in setting aside the verdict which was rendered upon the first trial, stated that such evidence might be obtained upon an examination before trial, in affirming the order setting aside the verdict upon the first appeal (242 App. Div. 624), this court did not intend thereby to give the impression that it agreed in all respects with the opinion as written.
The judgment should be reversed and a new trial ordered, with costs to the appellant to abide the event.
Present'—Martin, P. J., O'Malley, Glennon, Untermyer and Dore, JJ.; Dore, J., dissents and votes for affirmance.