Carolan v. Venechanos

236 A.D. 812

Opinion

Judgment unanimously affirmed, with costs. The evidence permitted a finding that the decedent was struck on the crosswalk when he had all but passed the truck which was being driven between the westerly rail of the south-bound track and the westerly curb of Third avenue. ■ The front left wheel of the truck was at or close to the westerly rail at the time of the impact and its rear wheels were both to the west of this rail, showing the truck in a diagonal position from northwest to southeast, thus refuting the claim of the defense that the truck was being driven on the [813]*813south-bound track. The distance the decedent was thrown permitted the inference of speed. The police regulation (quoted and applied in Cherubino v. Meenan, 253 N. Y. 462, at p. 464), under the authority of that case, accorded to the decedent the right of way over this truck. The slightest observance of this ordinance

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Carolan v. Venechanos, 236 A.D. 812 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1932).

236 A.D. 812 (Carolan v. Venechanos) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Chamberlain v. . Lehigh Valley R.R. Co.
144 N.E. 512 (New York Court of Appeals, 1924)
Cherubino v. Meenan
171 N.E. 708 (New York Court of Appeals, 1930)
Crough v. New York Central Railroad
229 A.D. 340 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1930)