Greenwood v. Luke A. Burke & Sons Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Greenwood v. Luke A. Burke & Sons Co.

184 A.D. 897

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Greenwood v. Luke A. Burke & Sons Co.. Read the opinion of the Court — 174 A.D. 363 →

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided May 15, 1918·Published

Opinion

Jenks, P. J. (dissenting): I dissent.

The circumstances of the accident are told in our former opinion (174 App. Div. 363), although we did not consider the negligence of the defendant. This verdict would hold the defendant for “ an accident which he could not be reasonably expected to foresee.” (21 Halsbury’s Laws of England, 363, quoted in Paul v. Consolidated Fireworks Co., 212 N. Y. 117-120; Dougan v. Champlain Transportation Co., 56 id. 1; Jex v. Straus, 122 id. 293; Beetz v. City of Brooklyn, 10 App. Div. 382; Loftus v. Union Ferry Co. of Brooklyn, 84 N. Y. 455; Ten Broeck v. Deinhardt, 120 App. Div. 473.)

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

Jenks, P. J. (dissenting): I dissent.

The circumstances of the accident are told in our former opinion (174 App. Div. 363), although we did not consider the negligence of the defendant. This verdict would hold the defendant for “ an accident which he could not be reasonably expected to foresee.” (21 Halsbury’s Laws of England, 363, quoted in Paul v. Consolidated Fireworks Co., 212 N. Y. 117-120; Dougan v. Champlain Transportation Co., 56 id. 1; Jex v. Straus, 122 id. 293; Beetz v. City of Brooklyn, 10 App. Div. 382; Loftus v. Union Ferry Co. of Brooklyn, 84 N. Y. 455; Ten Broeck v. Deinhardt, 120 App. Div. 473.)

Greenwood v. Luke A. Burke & Sons Co., 184 A.D. 897 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1918).

Pincite

184 A.D. 897 (Greenwood v. Luke A. Burke & Sons Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related