Davis v. Long Island R.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Davis v. Long Island R.

143 N.Y.S. 1112

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

DecidedNovember 13, 1913

StatusPublished

This text of 143 N.Y.S. 1112 (Davis v. Long Island R.) 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

Davis v. Long Island R., 143 N.Y.S. 1112 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1913).

Pincite

Opinion

SEABURY, J.

Plaintiff sued to recover dam-

ages for personal injuries sustained by her while a passenger upon one of the trains of the defendant While plaintiff was seated in the car, a person not shown to he an employé of the defendant entered the car and dropped a board which he was carrying, upon the plaintiff's foot. It is for the injury thus caused that the plaintiff has recovered judgment. There is no evidence to show that the person who dropped the board was an employd of the defendant, and no evidence to show that the servants of the defendant in charge of the car were guilty of any act of negligence. It follows that the )udgment must be reversed, with costs, and the complaint dismissed, with costs, without prejudice. All concur. -

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

SEABURY, J.

Plaintiff sued to recover dam-

ages for personal injuries sustained by her while a passenger upon one of the trains of the defendant While plaintiff was seated in the car, a person not shown to he an employé of the defendant entered the car and dropped a board which he was carrying, upon the plaintiff's foot. It is for the injury thus caused that the plaintiff has recovered judgment. There is no evidence to show that the person who dropped the board was an employd of the defendant, and no evidence to show that the servants of the defendant in charge of the car were guilty of any act of negligence. It follows that the )udgment must be reversed, with costs, and the complaint dismissed, with costs, without prejudice. All concur. -

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

143 N.Y.S. 1112, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/davis-v-long-island-r-nyappdiv-1913.