McCarthy v. Pennsylvania Railroad

Second Circuit

McCarthy v. Pennsylvania Railroad

227 F.2d 382

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit

DecidedNovember 23, 1955

DocketNo. 108, Docket 23725

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 227 F.2d 382 (McCarthy v. Pennsylvania Railroad) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

McCarthy v. Pennsylvania Railroad, 227 F.2d 382 (2d Cir. 1955).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

There was sufficient evidence to present an issue for the jury in support of plaintiff’s contention that the operator of the electric baggage truck might have chosen a safe path on the other side of the station platform, instead of the course he followed — next the train discharging and receiving passengers. See, e. g., Callaghan v. City of New York, 283 App.Div. 388, 128 N.Y.S.2d 206.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

There was sufficient evidence to present an issue for the jury in support of plaintiff’s contention that the operator of the electric baggage truck might have chosen a safe path on the other side of the station platform, instead of the course he followed — next the train discharging and receiving passengers. See, e. g., Callaghan v. City of New York, 283 App.Div. 388, 128 N.Y.S.2d 206.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

227 F.2d 382, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mccarthy-v-pennsylvania-railroad-ca2-1955.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack