Knox v. Palmer

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Knox v. Palmer

247 A.D. 798

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedMarch 15, 1936

StatusPublished

This text of 247 A.D. 798 (Knox v. Palmer) 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

Knox v. Palmer, 247 A.D. 798 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1936).

Pincite

Opinion

Action for damages for personal injuries resulting from the negligence of the defendant in driving around a curve and striking the plaintiff as he was crossing the street. The defendant’s automobile was moving at a high rate of speed and no warning signal of his approach was given. The plaintiff was struck after he had nearly reached the center of the street. He had looked north in the direction from which the defendant’s car was coming and saw nothing. He then turned to look toward possible traffic that might be coming in the opposite direction. Just” as he turned to look again the car struck him. The sole question raised on this appeal is that the plaintiff was contributorily negligent as a matter of law. Judgment unanimously affirmed, with costs. (Baker v. Close, 204 N. Y. 92; Knapp v. Barrett, 216 id. 226, and Pierce v. Armour & Co., 226 App. Div. 393; affd., 253 N. Y. 568.) Present — Young, Hagarty, Davis, Johnston and Adel, JJ.

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

Action for damages for personal injuries resulting from the negligence of the defendant in driving around a curve and striking the plaintiff as he was crossing the street. The defendant’s automobile was moving at a high rate of speed and no warning signal of his approach was given. The plaintiff was struck after he had nearly reached the center of the street. He had looked north in the direction from which the defendant’s car was coming and saw nothing. He then turned to look toward possible traffic that might be coming in the opposite direction. Just” as he turned to look again the car struck him. The sole question raised on this appeal is that the plaintiff was contributorily negligent as a matter of law. Judgment unanimously affirmed, with costs. (Baker v. Close, 204 N. Y. 92; Knapp v. Barrett, 216 id. 226, and Pierce v. Armour & Co., 226 App. Div. 393; affd., 253 N. Y. 568.) Present — Young, Hagarty, Davis, Johnston and Adel, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

247 A.D. 798, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/knox-v-palmer-nyappdiv-1936.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack