Lamberton v. Delaware & Hudson Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Lamberton v. Delaware & Hudson Co.

230 A.D. 749

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided June 15, 1930·Published

Opinion

Judgment and order unanimously affirmed, with costs, on the ground that the charge of the trial court as to warning signals by whistle and bell did not contain reversible error under the pleadings, proofs and circumstances of this case, and on the authority of Smith v. Lehigh Valley R. R. Co. (77 App. Div. 43) and Cepenobwiz v. New York Central & H. R. R. R. Co. (147 id. 188, 193). Present — Van Kirk, P. J., Hinman, Davis, Hill and Hasbrouek, JJ.

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

Judgment and order unanimously affirmed, with costs, on the ground that the charge of the trial court as to warning signals by whistle and bell did not contain reversible error under the pleadings, proofs and circumstances of this case, and on the authority of Smith v. Lehigh Valley R. R. Co. (77 App. Div. 43) and Cepenobwiz v. New York Central & H. R. R. R. Co. (147 id. 188, 193). Present — Van Kirk, P. J., Hinman, Davis, Hill and Hasbrouek, JJ.

Lamberton v. Delaware & Hudson Co., 230 A.D. 749 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1930).

Pincite

230 A.D. 749 (Lamberton v. Delaware & Hudson Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related