Fabian v. Schenectady Rapid Transit, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Fabian v. Schenectady Rapid Transit, Inc.

243 A.D. 834

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

DecidedMarch 15, 1935

StatusPublished

This text of 243 A.D. 834 (Fabian v. Schenectady Rapid Transit, Inc.) 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

Fabian v. Schenectady Rapid Transit, Inc., 243 A.D. 834 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1935).

Pincite

Opinion

Plaintiff, an infant, aged three years, four months, eighteen days, in the custody of his grandmother, was standing on a loading platform or island on State street in the city of Schenectady for the purpose of becoming a passenger on defendant’s bus. There is testimony that a gas cap protruded from the side of the bus from one to four inches and that it caught plaintiff’s coat and dragged him under the wheels of the bus, resulting in the injuries to recover damages for which the action is brought. The trial court submitted to the jury as a question of fact whether the infant was or was not sui juris. Judgment and order unanimously affirmed, with costs and disbursements to respondent. Present — Hill, P. J., MeNamee, Crapser, Bliss and Heffernan, JJ.

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

Plaintiff, an infant, aged three years, four months, eighteen days, in the custody of his grandmother, was standing on a loading platform or island on State street in the city of Schenectady for the purpose of becoming a passenger on defendant’s bus. There is testimony that a gas cap protruded from the side of the bus from one to four inches and that it caught plaintiff’s coat and dragged him under the wheels of the bus, resulting in the injuries to recover damages for which the action is brought. The trial court submitted to the jury as a question of fact whether the infant was or was not sui juris. Judgment and order unanimously affirmed, with costs and disbursements to respondent. Present — Hill, P. J., MeNamee, Crapser, Bliss and Heffernan, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

243 A.D. 834, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fabian-v-schenectady-rapid-transit-inc-nyappdiv-1935.