Martin v. Fonda Railroad

225 A.D. 835

Opinion

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. Davis, Hinman, Whitmyer and Hill, JJ., concur; Van Kirk, P. J., dissents on the ground that plaintiff failed to show that she was free from contributory negligence; she could see the gas car approaching when she was thirty feet from the nearest rail; she was familiar with the crossing. (Raymer v. Rutland R. R. Co., 204 App. Div. 135; Cassidy v. Fonda, J. & G. R. R. Co., 200 id. 241; affd., 234 N. Y. 599; Bowden v. Lehigh Valley R. R. Co., 178 App. Div. 413; affd., 226 N. Y. 648; Avery v. N. Y., O. & W. R. Co., 205 id. 502; Baltimore & Ohio R. R. Co. v. Goodman, 275 U. S. 66.)

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

Martin v. Fonda Railroad, 225 A.D. 835 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1929).

225 A.D. 835 (Martin v. Fonda Railroad) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Baltimore & Ohio Railroad v. Goodman
275 U.S. 66 (Supreme Court, 1927)
Cassidy v. . Fonda, Johnstown and Gloversville Rd. Co.
138 N.E. 462 (New York Court of Appeals, 1922)
Bowden v. . Lehigh Valley Railroad Company
123 N.E. 857 (New York Court of Appeals, 1919)
Bowden v. Lehigh Valley Railroad
178 A.D. 413 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1917)
Raymer v. Rutland Railroad
204 A.D. 135 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1923)