Schechter v. Klanfer
New York Court of Appeals
269 N.E.2d 812 (1971)
- Written by Haley Gintis, JD
Facts
On the evening of August 25, 1964, 14-year-old Robert Schechter (plaintiff) was operating his father’s motorboat on a lake. Schechter’s friend, Alice Stone, was also onboard. Schechter and Stone were struck by a motorboat operated by Robert Klanfer (defendant). Following the accident, Schechter was comatose for several days and suffered a fractured skull, jaw, and arm. A medical expert later testified that Schechter sustained brain damage resulting in amnesia. During the trial, Stone testified that Schechter’s boat was traveling about four miles per hour with the lights on and that Klanfer’s boat was traveling about 30 miles an hour. The speed limit was 10 miles per hour. Klanfer disputed the speed at which he was traveling, and that Schechter’s boat had lights. Schechter testified that he had no memory of the accident due to his amnesia. After Schechter’s testimony, the trial court instructed the jury that if they believed Schechter had amnesia, they were to hold him to a lesser degree of persuasion than what would ordinarily be required. Klanfer objected and the trial court withdrew the instruction. The jury returned a verdict in Klanfer’s favor. Schechter appealed on the ground that he should be held to a lesser burden of persuasion because of his inability to recall the events surrounding the accident.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Breitel, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 803,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
