Lewis v. Gleason

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Lewis v. Gleason

123 N.Y.S. 36

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedMay 24, 1910

StatusPublished

This text of 123 N.Y.S. 36 (Lewis v. Gleason) 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

Lewis v. Gleason, 123 N.Y.S. 36 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1910).

Pincite

Opinion

SEABURY, J.

This action was brought to recover damages for loss of services occasioned through injuries which the plaintiff’s wife sustained through the alleged negligence of the defendant in maintaining a defective coal hole in front of premises owned by the defendant.

As tending to establish the defendant’s negligence the court below admitted evidence of the condition of the coal hole 30 days after the accident, and that the defendant then caused it to be repaired. This evidence was received over the objection and exception of the defendant, and constituted prejudicial error. Whether the defendant was negligent was a question which should have been decided upon the facts as they existed at the time of the accident. Clapper v. Town of Waterford, 131 N. Y. 382, 30 N. E. 240.

Judgment reversed, and new trial ordered, 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

SEABURY, J.

This action was brought to recover damages for loss of services occasioned through injuries which the plaintiff’s wife sustained through the alleged negligence of the defendant in maintaining a defective coal hole in front of premises owned by the defendant.

As tending to establish the defendant’s negligence the court below admitted evidence of the condition of the coal hole 30 days after the accident, and that the defendant then caused it to be repaired. This evidence was received over the objection and exception of the defendant, and constituted prejudicial error. Whether the defendant was negligent was a question which should have been decided upon the facts as they existed at the time of the accident. Clapper v. Town of Waterford, 131 N. Y. 382, 30 N. E. 240.

Judgment reversed, and new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide the event. All concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

123 N.Y.S. 36, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lewis-v-gleason-nyappterm-1910.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack