Keeler v. Long Island Rail Road Company
Opinion
Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.
Concur: Loughran, Ch. J., Lewis, Desmond, Fuld and Bromley, JJ. Conway and Dye, JJ., dissent and vote to reverse and grant a new trial upon the following grounds: (1) that there was a question of fact presented as to whether the accident was one which should reasonably have been foreseen by the defendant, (2) that there was a question of fact as to whether the covering of the third rail was adequate in view of the fact that plaintiff’s intestate was crossing from a path closely paralleling this dangerous death-dealing instrumentality alongside railroad tracks in which grass and weeds had been permitted to grow, and (3) that it was error to exclude proof of a prior similar accident within 300 feet of the place of the instant accident in which another boy had been injured under similar circumstances.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
86 N.E.2d 180 (Keeler v. Long Island Rail Road Company) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.