Conlin v. Yonkers Railroad

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Conlin v. Yonkers Railroad

255 A.D. 809, 7 N.Y.S.2d 360, 1938 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5398

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

DecidedOctober 28, 1938

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 255 A.D. 809 (Conlin v. Yonkers 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

Conlin v. Yonkers Railroad, 255 A.D. 809, 7 N.Y.S.2d 360, 1938 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5398 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1938).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action by a passenger on defendant’s street railway to recover damages for personal injuries, it appeared that the car was crowded, and that when she came to her destination there was a considerable number of persons waiting to board the car. While alighting, she was pushed or jostled by one of the persons attempting to board the car and fell to the ground, sustaining injuries. The motorman in charge of the car made no effort, by word or act, to restrain the persons attempting to board the ear so that those attempting to get off might safely alight. Instead, he permitted passengers to come on board and took their transfers and fares and made change. The plaintiff had a verdict in the City Court of Yonkers. Judgment affirmed, with costs. It was a question of fact for the jury whether the defendant performed its duty in exercising a high degree of care for the safety of its passengers, including the plaintiff, at the time and place of the accident. (Hansen v. North Jersey St. Ry. Co., 64 N. J. L. 686; 46 A. 718; Franz v. Holyoke Street Ry. Co., 239 Mass. 565; 132 N. E. 270; Glennen v. Boston Elevated Ry. Co., 207 Mass. 497; 93 N. E. 700.) Hagarty, Davis and Taylor, JJ., concur; Johnston and Close, JJ., dissent and vote for reversal and dismissal of the complaint upon the ground that no negligence on the part of the defendant was shown.

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

In an action by a passenger on defendant’s street railway to recover damages for personal injuries, it appeared that the car was crowded, and that when she came to her destination there was a considerable number of persons waiting to board the car. While alighting, she was pushed or jostled by one of the persons attempting to board the car and fell to the ground, sustaining injuries. The motorman in charge of the car made no effort, by word or act, to restrain the persons attempting to board the ear so that those attempting to get off might safely alight. Instead, he permitted passengers to come on board and took their transfers and fares and made change. The plaintiff had a verdict in the City Court of Yonkers. Judgment affirmed, with costs. It was a question of fact for the jury whether the defendant performed its duty in exercising a high degree of care for the safety of its passengers, including the plaintiff, at the time and place of the accident. (Hansen v. North Jersey St. Ry. Co., 64 N. J. L. 686; 46 A. 718; Franz v. Holyoke Street Ry. Co., 239 Mass. 565; 132 N. E. 270; Glennen v. Boston Elevated Ry. Co., 207 Mass. 497; 93 N. E. 700.) Hagarty, Davis and Taylor, JJ., concur; Johnston and Close, JJ., dissent and vote for reversal and dismissal of the complaint upon the ground that no negligence on the part of the defendant was shown.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

255 A.D. 809, 7 N.Y.S.2d 360, 1938 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5398, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/conlin-v-yonkers-railroad-nyappdiv-1938.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack