Mackey v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Mackey v. City of New York

121 A.D. 473, 106 N.Y.S. 114, 1907 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1799

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

DecidedOctober 4, 1907

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 121 A.D. 473 (Mackey v. City of New York) 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

Mackey v. City of New York, 121 A.D. 473, 106 N.Y.S. 114, 1907 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1799 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1907).

Pincite

Opinion

Miller, J.:

This is a sidewalk case. The .'defect complained of was a depress sion caused by the construction, of a curb about ten or twelve inches from the old curb without sufficiently filling in the intervening space. The plaintiff was permitted to prove, over the specific objection that the evidence was irrelevant, that this space was filled in shortly after the accident. Such evidence in this class of cases has too'frequently been condemned to require any discussion-Or citation of - authorities now. As the judgment must be reversed for said error it would be profitless to discuss the merits at this time:

I advise that the judgment and order be reversed.

Jenks, Hooker, Gaynor and Rich, JJ., concurred.

Judgment and order reversed and new trial granted, costs to abide the event.

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

Miller, J.:

This is a sidewalk case. The .'defect complained of was a depress sion caused by the construction, of a curb about ten or twelve inches from the old curb without sufficiently filling in the intervening space. The plaintiff was permitted to prove, over the specific objection that the evidence was irrelevant, that this space was filled in shortly after the accident. Such evidence in this class of cases has too'frequently been condemned to require any discussion-Or citation of - authorities now. As the judgment must be reversed for said error it would be profitless to discuss the merits at this time:

I advise that the judgment and order be reversed.

Jenks, Hooker, Gaynor and Rich, JJ., concurred.

Judgment and order reversed and new trial granted, costs to abide the event.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

121 A.D. 473, 106 N.Y.S. 114, 1907 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1799, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mackey-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-1907.

Opinion

I advise that the judgment and order be reversed.

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack