Curran v. New York Central & Hudson River Railroad

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Curran v. New York Central & Hudson River Railroad

30 Misc. 787, 63 N.Y.S. 209

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedMarch 15, 1900

StatusPublished

This text of 30 Misc. 787 (Curran v. New York Central & Hudson River Railroad) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Curran v. New York Central & Hudson River Railroad, 30 Misc. 787, 63 N.Y.S. 209 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1900).

Pincite

Opinion

Truax, P. J.

If the defendant was negligent in allowing the soda to get wet, it was negligence of which the plaintiffs had no right to complain. It was not their soda. The evidence and admissions show that the plaintiffs knew that the soda was wet, and that soda when wet would burn human flesh, if it touched the flesh. Knowing this, the plaintiffs should have handled the soda more carefully than they did. Their carelessness brought about their injuries.

Judgment reversed and new trial ordered in the Municipal Court in the district in which the action was brought, with costs to appellant to abide event.

Dugro, J., concurs; Scott, J., concurs in result.

Judgment reversed and new trial ordered.

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

Truax, P. J.

If the defendant was negligent in allowing the soda to get wet, it was negligence of which the plaintiffs had no right to complain. It was not their soda. The evidence and admissions show that the plaintiffs knew that the soda was wet, and that soda when wet would burn human flesh, if it touched the flesh. Knowing this, the plaintiffs should have handled the soda more carefully than they did. Their carelessness brought about their injuries.

Judgment reversed and new trial ordered in the Municipal Court in the district in which the action was brought, with costs to appellant to abide event.

Dugro, J., concurs; Scott, J., concurs in result.

Judgment reversed and new trial ordered.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

30 Misc. 787, 63 N.Y.S. 209, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/curran-v-new-york-central-hudson-river-railroad-nyappterm-1900.