Meyer v. Whisnant
This text of 121 N.E.2d 372 (Meyer v. Whisnant) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinions
The dismissal of the complaints as against defendant-respondent Whisnant should be affirmed. The sudden, unanticipated and unexplained dash of the Bien car, across the highway and into Whisnant’s path, made him the helpless victim of what was, beyond any dispute, an emergency with the creation of which Whisnant had nothing to do. Such violations as Whisnant may have been guilty of were no proof of negligent causation by him, since there was no possible logical connection between any of them, and the accident (see Brown v. Shyne, 242 N. Y. 176, 180; Tedla v. Ellman, 280 N. Y. 124; Hagadorn v. Socony-Vacuum Oil Co., 298 N. Y. 882; Goldblatt v. Tabacco, 299 N. Y. 663; Restatement, Torts, § 286).
The judgment should be affirmed, with costs.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
121 N.E.2d 372, 307 N.Y. 369, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/meyer-v-whisnant-ny-1954.