Meagher v. International Railway Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Meagher v. International Railway Co.

271 A.D.2d 945

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

DecidedJanuary 8, 1947

StatusPublished

This text of 271 A.D.2d 945 (Meagher v. International Railway Co.) 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

Meagher v. International Railway Co., 271 A.D.2d 945 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1947).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. Memorandum: The plaintiff was not required to call experts as to her future condition. If the jury believed the plaintiff would be unable to teach in the future, they could not refuse to act in that belief. (Record v. Village of Saratoga Springs, 46 Hun 448, 451, affd. 120 N. Y. 646; Meiselman v. Crown Heights Hospital, 285 N. Y„ 389, 396; Shaw v. Tague, 257 N. Y. 193, 195.) All concur. (The judgment is for plaintiff in an action for damages for personal injuries alleged to have been sustained by reason of plaintiff’s having been negligently struck by one of defendant’s busses. The order denies a motion for a new trial.) Present — Taylor, P. J., Dowling, MeCurn, Larkin and Love, JJ.

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

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. Memorandum: The plaintiff was not required to call experts as to her future condition. If the jury believed the plaintiff would be unable to teach in the future, they could not refuse to act in that belief. (Record v. Village of Saratoga Springs, 46 Hun 448, 451, affd. 120 N. Y. 646; Meiselman v. Crown Heights Hospital, 285 N. Y„ 389, 396; Shaw v. Tague, 257 N. Y. 193, 195.) All concur. (The judgment is for plaintiff in an action for damages for personal injuries alleged to have been sustained by reason of plaintiff’s having been negligently struck by one of defendant’s busses. The order denies a motion for a new trial.) Present — Taylor, P. J., Dowling, MeCurn, Larkin and Love, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

271 A.D.2d 945, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/meagher-v-international-railway-co-nyappdiv-1947.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack