Moore v. New York City Railway Co.

52 Misc. 663, 102 N.Y.S. 636
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York·Decided February 15, 1907·Published

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

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

52 Misc. 663 (Moore v. New York City Railway Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.