Thompson v. Holzhauer

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. Van Kirk, P. J., Davis, Whitmyer and Hill, JJ., concur; Hinman, J., dissents on the ground that the plaintiff’s version is incredible as a matter of law in view of the undisputed physical facts; that the verdict^[1] was contrary to the evidence, there being no explanation of how it was physically possible for plaintiff to have been thrown to the center of the road if struck as testified to by the plaintiff’s witnesses.