Cohen v. New York City Railway Co.

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Cohen v. New York City Railway Co.

95 N.Y.S. 1122

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York·Decided October 27, 1905·Published

Opinion

BISCHOFF, J.

It appears from the evidence that the plaintiff failed to use any care in .the matter of looking for approaching cars at a point where the result of his observations would have been of moment. Substantial justice is to be served by the submission of the case to another jury, and in our opinion the order setting aside the verdict involved no erroneous exercise of discretion. Order affirmed, with costs.

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

BISCHOFF, J.

It appears from the evidence that the plaintiff failed to use any care in .the matter of looking for approaching cars at a point where the result of his observations would have been of moment. Substantial justice is to be served by the submission of the case to another jury, and in our opinion the order setting aside the verdict involved no erroneous exercise of discretion. Order affirmed, with costs.

Cohen v. New York City Railway Co., 95 N.Y.S. 1122 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1905).

Pincite

95 N.Y.S. 1122 (Cohen v. New York City Railway Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.