McCarthy v. Fleischmann Bros.

125 N.Y.S. 1129
CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York
DecidedDecember 8, 1910
StatusPublished

This text of 125 N.Y.S. 1129 (McCarthy v. Fleischmann Bros.) 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
McCarthy v. Fleischmann Bros., 125 N.Y.S. 1129 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1910).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

There is no evidence that defendant Rapp Construction Company was in control of the stairway, and no evidence of negligence on its part sufficient to sustain the verdict in favor of the plaintiff against it. As to this defendant, therefore, the judgment should be reversed and a new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide the event. As to the defendant Fleischmann Bros. Company the judgment finds ample support in the evidence, and is affirmed. Dougherty v. Weeks, 126 App. Div. 786, 111 N. Y. Supp. 218. Judgment reversed as to the defendant Rapp Construction Company and a new trial ordered, with costs "to appellant to abide the event. As to the defendant Fleischmann Bros. Company, judgment affirmed with costs.

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

Related

Dougherty v. D. C. Weeks & Son
126 A.D. 786 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1908)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
125 N.Y.S. 1129, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mccarthy-v-fleischmann-bros-nyappterm-1910.