Case Name: Carl Edelstein, Respondent, v. Ronald Thomas et al., Appellants
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1966-03-31
Citations: 25 A.D.2d 714
Docket Number: 
Parties: Carl Edelstein, Respondent, v. Ronald Thomas et al., Appellants.
Judges: Present— Bastow, J. P., Goldman, Henry) D'el Vecehio- and Marsh, JJ.
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 25
Pages: 714–714

Head Matter:
Carl Edelstein, Respondent, v. Ronald Thomas et al., Appellants.

Opinion:
Judgment unanimously affirmed, without costs of this appeal' to either party. Memorandum: In the light of the factual situation- presented here it does not appear the defendant could have been prejudiced either by the court's confused instructions in answer to a jiuror's question, latex élarified, or by his unusual conduct in having the jury returned to the eourt-room after two hours' deliberation to' a'sk of. eaeh- individual juror if he- had any question, which practice we do- not approve. While some of the ensuing questions and comments added only to the confusion- of the situation there would appear to- be nothing presented that- prejudiced- the rights of the parties to a fair and proper' determination of the issues. (Appeal from judgment of Brie Trial Term for plaintiff in an automobile negligence action.}
Present— Bastow, J. P., Goldman, Henry) D'el Vecehio- and Marsh, JJ.