Case Name: Joseph De Vito, Appellant, v. William Knettel, Respondent
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Term
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1961-05-23
Citations: 32 Misc. 2d 656
Docket Number: 
Parties: Joseph De Vito, Appellant, v. William Knettel, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Miscellaneous Reports
Volume: 32
Pages: 656–656

Head Matter:
Joseph De Vito, Appellant, v. William Knettel, Respondent.
Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department,
May 23, 1961.
Jules B. St. Germain for appellant. John E. Morris and Louis M. Schachter for respondent.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
The purported verdict was recorded as follows: " The jury believes there was negligence on both sides but the greater negligence was contributed by Mr. Knettel, therefore awarding Mr. De Vito the sum of $750." The foregoing does not constitute a general verdict within the meaning of section 458 of the Civil Practice Act and the court should have directed the jury to return for further deliberation and bring in a proper verdict. (Conrey v. Metropolitan St. Ry. Co., 73 App. Div. 518; Swift v. Fairyland Park, 2 Misc 2d 155; Savko v. Brooklyn & Queens Tr. Corp., 166 Misc. 84, affd. App. Term, 2d Dept., Jan. 15, 1938; Klepper v. Seymour House Corp., 246 N. Y. 85, 95; Warner v. New York Cent. R. R. Co., 52 N. Y. 437; Bourcier v. Peryor, 267 App. Div. 932.)
The judgment and order should be unanimously reversed, without costs, and motion for a new trial granted.
Concur — Di Giovanna, Benjamín and Daly, J j.
Judgment and order reversed, etc.