Cochran v. Norfolk Southern Railroad

138 Misc. 74, 244 N.Y.S. 326, 1930 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1481
CourtCity of New York Municipal Court
DecidedJune 6, 1930
StatusPublished

This text of 138 Misc. 74 (Cochran v. Norfolk Southern Railroad) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering City of New York Municipal Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Cochran v. Norfolk Southern Railroad, 138 Misc. 74, 244 N.Y.S. 326, 1930 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1481 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1930).

Opinion

Davies, Official Referee.

I hereby find and decide that no claim against the defendant as asserted can be sustained, except as to the neghgent and apparently unreasonable refusal of the Pennsylvania Railroad Company employees to unload the plaintiffs’ two [76]*76carloads of potatoes in time for the June ninth market, even though they did unload two other carloads of potatoes arriving on the same train and float. By reason of this refusal, plaintiffs lost the benefit of the June ninth market and suffered the loss incidental to a sudden drop in the market price between June ninth and June tenth. Under the authority of Wishnatzki v. Great Northern R. R. Co. (225 App. Div. 62) plaintiffs are entitled to a verdict against the Pennsylvania Railroad Company, and I find the amount of damage to be $750.

Judgment, therefore, for the plaintiffs in the sum of $750, and I order and adjudge that said plaintiffs have judgment accordingly.

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

Related

Wishnatzki v. Great Northern Railway Co.
225 A.D. 62 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1928)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
138 Misc. 74, 244 N.Y.S. 326, 1930 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1481, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cochran-v-norfolk-southern-railroad-nynyccityct-1930.