# Brown v. Ogilvie

> Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · April 15, 1925 · 213 A.D. 881

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/5279288

## Case

- **Full name:** Laura B. Brown v. Jessie M. Ogilvie and Another, Copartners, etc.
- **Court:** Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
- **Decided:** April 15, 1925
- **Citations:** 213 A.D. 881
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion of the court
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/5279288

## Opinion text

Order reversed upon the law and the facts, and verdict unanimously reinstated, with costs. While this court will not generally interfere with the discretion of the trial court in setting aside a verdict and granting a new trial as against the weight of the evidence, in the present case there was eoneededly a question for the jury as to the liability of the defendants. There was a trial which was entirely fair to the plaintiff, and we think, upon the undisputed facts, the jury were justified in rendering the verdict in favor of the defendant. The case of Cahill v. Inecto, Inc. ( 208 App. Div. 191 ) is not in point. In that case no effort was made by the defendant to .show the composition of the substance used. In the present case there was evidence to show that henna was used, and that this substance is harmless in its application to the hair. Kelly, P. J., Jaycox, Manning. Young and Kapper, JJ., concur.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/5279288. Public record. Not legal advice.