Mathesen v. City of New York

188 Misc. 1018, 72 N.Y.S.2d 437, 1947 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2768
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York·Decided April 24, 1947·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Memorandum In determining whether reasonable care has been used by the city in clearing streets and walks after a snowfall, it is proper to consider the amount of snow required to be moved, the number of miles of sidewalk and roadway, the means and methods used to remove the snow and the condition of the sidewalks in the immediate vicinity. It was error to exclude evidence as to these matters. (See Reutlinger v. City of New York, 255 App. Div. 848, affd. 281 N. Y. 592; Shyatt v. City of New York, 283 N. Y. 709.)

The judgment should be unanimously reversed upon the law and new trial granted, with costs to defendant to abide the event.

Mao Crate, Steinbrink and Golden, JJ., concur.

Judgment reversed, etc.

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

Mathesen v. City of New York, 188 Misc. 1018, 72 N.Y.S.2d 437, 1947 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2768 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1947).

188 Misc. 1018 (Mathesen v. City of New York) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Reutlinger v. City of New York
22 N.E.2d 165 (New York Court of Appeals, 1939)
Sturman v. New York Central Railroad Company
28 N.E.2d 720 (New York Court of Appeals, 1940)
Reutlinger v. City of New York
255 A.D. 848 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1938)