Mordente v. New York Cab Co.

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Mordente v. New York Cab Co.

109 N.Y.S. 12

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedMarch 5, 1908

StatusPublished

This text of 109 N.Y.S. 12 (Mordente v. New York Cab 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

Mordente v. New York Cab Co., 109 N.Y.S. 12 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1908).

Pincite

Opinions

BISCHOFF, J.

There was acceptable evidence that the plaintiff crossed Broadway from west to east at Howard street, and was struck by the defendant’s cab, which was being driven rapidly uptown between the east car track and the curb. The justice was also authorized to find from the testimony that there was nothing to obstruct the driver’s view, and that he was apprised of the plaintiff’s attempt to cross the street at a point where, with ordinary care, he could well have avoided the accident. The plaintiff does not seem [13]*13to have observed the approaching cab, but this was not necessarily negligence on his part; the proximate cause of the accident being the rapid pace of the vehicle and the failure to check its speed at a point where pedestrians were to be expected.

The doctor’s bill being $41, and the plaintiff having suffered pain during a confinement to his bed for three weeks, the award of $300 damages cannot be said to be excessive.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.

GILDERSLEEVE, P. J., concurs.

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

BISCHOFF, J.

There was acceptable evidence that the plaintiff crossed Broadway from west to east at Howard street, and was struck by the defendant’s cab, which was being driven rapidly uptown between the east car track and the curb. The justice was also authorized to find from the testimony that there was nothing to obstruct the driver’s view, and that he was apprised of the plaintiff’s attempt to cross the street at a point where, with ordinary care, he could well have avoided the accident. The plaintiff does not seem [13]*13to have observed the approaching cab, but this was not necessarily negligence on his part; the proximate cause of the accident being the rapid pace of the vehicle and the failure to check its speed at a point where pedestrians were to be expected.

The doctor’s bill being $41, and the plaintiff having suffered pain during a confinement to his bed for three weeks, the award of $300 damages cannot be said to be excessive.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.

GILDERSLEEVE, P. J., concurs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

109 N.Y.S. 12, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mordente-v-new-york-cab-co-nyappterm-1908.