Barth v. Drago

¶1Judgment reversed on the law and the facts and a new trial granted, costs to abide the event. The court erred in charging the jury that there was no question with respect to whether or not the plaintiff had a broken nose. There was a conflict of evidence on this point, and the court’s charge was an invasion of the jury's function in this respect. Lazansky, P. J., Kapper, Hagarty, Carswell and Tompkins, JJ., concur.