Casey v. New York Central Railroad

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Casey v. New York Central Railroad

4 A.D.2d 1011, 168 N.Y.S.2d 233, 1957 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3767

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedDecember 3, 1957

StatusPublished

This text of 4 A.D.2d 1011 (Casey v. New York Central Railroad) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Casey v. New York Central Railroad, 4 A.D.2d 1011, 168 N.Y.S.2d 233, 1957 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3767 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1957).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment unanimously reversed upon the law and upon [1012]*1012the facts, with costs to the appellant, and judgment is directed to be entered in favor of the defendant dismissing the complaint, as a matter of law, with costs. Considering the physical arrangement and appearance of the pier buildings and entrance, there was no justification for plaintiff’s regarding the bumper blocks of the loading platform as a means of entrance to the pier. There was no implied invitation to plaintiff to use that means of entrance or to use the blocks as steps and the condition presented was not a dangerous one within reasonable contemplation. Concur — Peck, P. J., Rabin, Frank, Valente and McNally, JJ.

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

Judgment unanimously reversed upon the law and upon [1012]*1012the facts, with costs to the appellant, and judgment is directed to be entered in favor of the defendant dismissing the complaint, as a matter of law, with costs. Considering the physical arrangement and appearance of the pier buildings and entrance, there was no justification for plaintiff’s regarding the bumper blocks of the loading platform as a means of entrance to the pier. There was no implied invitation to plaintiff to use that means of entrance or to use the blocks as steps and the condition presented was not a dangerous one within reasonable contemplation. Concur — Peck, P. J., Rabin, Frank, Valente and McNally, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

4 A.D.2d 1011, 168 N.Y.S.2d 233, 1957 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3767, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/casey-v-new-york-central-railroad-nyappdiv-1957.