Koester v. Interurban St. Ry. Co.

90 N.Y.S. 375
CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York
DecidedNovember 10, 1904
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 90 N.Y.S. 375 (Koester v. Interurban St. Ry. Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Koester v. Interurban St. Ry. Co., 90 N.Y.S. 375 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1904).

Opinion

FREEDMAN, P. J.

Plaintiff’s theory, upon which he succeeded, was that defendant’s car was at a standstill at the time he attempted to board it. In this he remained wholly uncorroborated. Upon this point he was contradicted by four witnesses, two of [376]*376whom have no interest in the result of the action, and from whose testimony it appeared that at the time the car was in such rapid motion that plaintiff’s attempt to board it was dangerous. Admittedly the accident occurred in or about the middle of the block, and this strengthens defendant’s case upon the question of probabilities. In my opinion, the evidence preponderates so much in favor - of defendant’s theory that in the interest of justice a new trial should be ordered.

Judgment and order appealed from should be reversed, and a new trial ordered, with costs to the appellant to abide the event. All concur.

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

Related

Lillienthal v. New York City Railway Co.
95 N.Y.S. 593 (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 1905)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
90 N.Y.S. 375, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/koester-v-interurban-st-ry-co-nyappterm-1904.