Keefe v. New York City Railway Co.
94 N.Y.S. 1150
Opinion
I can find no evidence of negligence on the part of the defendant. There is no evidence that the conductor gave any signal to stop or in any way communicated to the driver the plaintiff’s desire to alight, or that the driver slowed up to permit him to do so. The case is even stronger against the plaintiff than Armstrong v. Met. St. Ry. Co., 36 App. Div. 525, 55 N. Y. Supp. 498, which it much resembles. The judgment should be reversed, and a new trial granted, with costs to appellant to abide the event. All concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Keefe v. New York City Railway Co., 94 N.Y.S. 1150 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1905).
94 N.Y.S. 1150 (Keefe v. New York City Railway Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Armstrong v. Metropolitan Street Railway Co.
36 A.D. 525 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1899)
Armstrong v. Metropolitan Street Railway Co.
55 N.Y.S. 498 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1899)