Freeman v. New York City Railway Co.

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Freeman v. New York City Railway Co.

92 N.Y.S. 47

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedFebruary 16, 1905

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 92 N.Y.S. 47 (Freeman v. New York City Railway Co.) 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

Freeman v. New York City Railway Co., 92 N.Y.S. 47 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1905).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The proof shows that plaintiff could have traveled to his point of destination by pursuing another route, over which, as he knew, the defendant issued transfers. It also shows, however, that he had frequently traveled over the route he selected, and had always theretofore been given a transfer. There is no evidence that any notice of the discontinuance of the issue of such transfers was given to him when he boarded the car, or until it had traveled some blocks. At that time no alternative continuous route was available. Even if it be conceded, under the reasoning of Hatch, J., in the Topham Case (Sup.) 89 N. Y. Supp. 298, that, where there are two alternative routes between the same points, the defendant has the right to grant transfers over only one and refuse it over the other, timely' notice should in some manner be given to the passenger while it is still open to him to use either route.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.

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

PER CURIAM.

The proof shows that plaintiff could have traveled to his point of destination by pursuing another route, over which, as he knew, the defendant issued transfers. It also shows, however, that he had frequently traveled over the route he selected, and had always theretofore been given a transfer. There is no evidence that any notice of the discontinuance of the issue of such transfers was given to him when he boarded the car, or until it had traveled some blocks. At that time no alternative continuous route was available. Even if it be conceded, under the reasoning of Hatch, J., in the Topham Case (Sup.) 89 N. Y. Supp. 298, that, where there are two alternative routes between the same points, the defendant has the right to grant transfers over only one and refuse it over the other, timely' notice should in some manner be given to the passenger while it is still open to him to use either route.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

92 N.Y.S. 47, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/freeman-v-new-york-city-railway-co-nyappterm-1905.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack