Hodge v. Rutland Railroad

112 A.D. 142, 97 N.Y.S. 1107, 1906 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 619
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMarch 7, 1906
StatusPublished
Cited by19 cases

This text of 112 A.D. 142 (Hodge v. Rutland Railroad) 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
Hodge v. Rutland Railroad, 112 A.D. 142, 97 N.Y.S. 1107, 1906 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 619 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1906).

Opinion

Kellogg, J.:

If Hodge (the decedent) had survived he could not recover against the defendant for an injury caused by the negligence of its servants. (Poucher v. N. Y. C. R. R. Co., 49 N. Y. 263; Bissell v. N. Y. C. R. R. Co., 25 id. 442.) The cause of-action for causing death by negligence is given by section 1902 of the Code of Civil Procedure, and is given only against a person “ who, or a corporation which, would have been liable to an action in favor of the decedent by reason thereof if death had not ensued.”

In Northern Pacific Railway Co. v. Adams (192 U. S. 440), where the Idaho statute gave a cause of action “ against the person causing the death ” and contained no provision similar to the one above quoted from our statute, it. was held that the company was not liable to the estate of a person killed by the company’s negligence, where he was riding on a contract which provided that the company [144]*144should not" be liable for any injury to his person. The same rule Fas been applied in this. State. (Bissell v. N. Y. C. R. R. Co., supra; Perkins v. N. Y. C. R. R. Co., 24 N. Y. 196.)

. The judgment and order are, therefore, reversed and a new trial granted, with costs to the appellant to abide the event.

All concurred.

Judgment and order reversed, and new trial granted, with costs to appellant to abide event.

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

Related

Weinberg v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp.
473 A.2d 22 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1984)
Woodward Iron Co. v. Craig
53 So. 2d 586 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1951)
Western Union Telegraph Co. v. Cochran
196 Misc. 122 (New York Supreme Court, 1949)
Holmes v. City of New York
269 A.D. 95 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1945)
Fontheim v. Third Avenue Railway Co.
257 A.D. 147 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1939)
Wilder v. Pennsylvania Railroad
217 A.D. 661 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1926)
Barnhart v. . American Concrete Steel Co.
125 N.E. 675 (New York Court of Appeals, 1920)
Anderson v. . Erie R.R. Co.
119 N.E. 557 (New York Court of Appeals, 1918)
Anderson v. Erie Railroad
171 A.D. 687 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1916)
Kelliher v. . N.Y.C. H.R.R.R. Co.
105 N.E. 824 (New York Court of Appeals, 1914)
Kelliher v. New York Central & Hudson River Railroad
212 N.Y. 207 (New York Court of Appeals, 1914)
Fish v. . D., L. W.R.R. Co.
105 N.E. 661 (New York Court of Appeals, 1914)
Fish v. Delaware, Lackawanna & Western Railroad
211 N.Y. 374 (New York Court of Appeals, 1914)
Willcox v. Erie Railroad
162 A.D. 94 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1914)
Fish v. Delaware, Lackawanna & Western Railroad
158 A.D. 92 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1913)
Healy v. New York Central & Hudson River Railroad
153 A.D. 516 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1912)
Kelliher v. New York Central & Hudson River Railroad
153 A.D. 617 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1912)
Kelliher v. New York Central & Hudson River Railroad
77 Misc. 330 (New York Supreme Court, 1912)
Hodge v. Rutland Railroad
115 A.D. 881 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1906)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
112 A.D. 142, 97 N.Y.S. 1107, 1906 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 619, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hodge-v-rutland-railroad-nyappdiv-1906.