Curry v. Nassau Electric Railroad

126 A.D. 934

Opinion

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. No opinion. Woodward, Hooker, Rich and Miller, JJ., concurred; Jenks, J., dissented on the ground that it was, an error to refuse the instruction that actual notice or knowledge of any rule of the railroad did not have to be brought home to the plaintiff (See Barker v. Central Park, etc., R. R. Co., 151 N. Y. 237, 242), and upon the further ground that there is no evidence that any excessive force was used, but only that necessary to eject the plaintiff within the right of the defendant.

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

Curry v. Nassau Electric Railroad, 126 A.D. 934 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1908).

126 A.D. 934 (Curry v. Nassau Electric Railroad) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Barker v. Central Park, North & East River Railroad
45 N.E. 550 (New York Court of Appeals, 1896)