Curtis v. . Hudson Valley Railway Company
107 N.E. 1075, 213 N.Y. 681, 1915 N.Y. LEXIS 1482
This text of 107 N.E. 1075 (Curtis v. . Hudson Valley Railway Company) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Bluebook
Curtis v. . Hudson Valley Railway Company, 107 N.E. 1075, 213 N.Y. 681, 1915 N.Y. LEXIS 1482 (N.Y. 1915).
Opinion
Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.
Concur: Willard Bartlett, Ch. J., Chase, Hogan, Miller and Cardozo, JJ.; Hiscock, J., dissents on the ground that improper evidence was received that the whistle did not blow and concerning the earnings of the decedent.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
107 N.E. 1075, 213 N.Y. 681, 1915 N.Y. LEXIS 1482, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/curtis-v-hudson-valley-railway-company-ny-1915.