Moore v. New York City Railway Co.

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Moore v. New York City Railway Co.

52 Misc. 663, 102 N.Y.S. 636

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedFebruary 15, 1907

StatusPublished

This text of 52 Misc. 663 (Moore v. New York City Railway Co.) 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

Moore v. New York City Railway Co., 52 Misc. 663, 102 N.Y.S. 636 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1907).

Pincite

Opinion

MacLean, J.

Prom the plaintiff’s own testimony that it was only a matter of a second or two that he was on the track' [664]*664before he was hit; that he had to be pretty quick, was not quick enough and the motorman was a little quicker, ^coupled with the testimony of his coachman that they went in on the track ahead of one of the elevated pillars and turned out before they came to the other, it would seem that the plaintiff took chances and required the exercise of greater care by the motorman, than he was seemingly willing to exercise himself, and that, too, at a point where the defendant may be said'to have had-a preferential, although not an exclusive, right.

The judgment should be reversed and a new trial ordered, with costs to the appellant to abide the event.

Gildebsleeve and Amebd, JJ., concur.

Judgment reversed and new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide event.

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

MacLean, J.

Prom the plaintiff’s own testimony that it was only a matter of a second or two that he was on the track' [664]*664before he was hit; that he had to be pretty quick, was not quick enough and the motorman was a little quicker, ^coupled with the testimony of his coachman that they went in on the track ahead of one of the elevated pillars and turned out before they came to the other, it would seem that the plaintiff took chances and required the exercise of greater care by the motorman, than he was seemingly willing to exercise himself, and that, too, at a point where the defendant may be said'to have had-a preferential, although not an exclusive, right.

The judgment should be reversed and a new trial ordered, with costs to the appellant to abide the event.

Gildebsleeve and Amebd, JJ., concur.

Judgment reversed and new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide event.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

52 Misc. 663, 102 N.Y.S. 636, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/moore-v-new-york-city-railway-co-nyappterm-1907.