Ockerman v. Johnson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Ockerman v. Johnson

272 A.D.2d 846

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

DecidedMay 7, 1947

StatusPublished

This text of 272 A.D.2d 846 (Ockerman v. Johnson) 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

Ockerman v. Johnson, 272 A.D.2d 846 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1947).

Pincite

Opinion

Plaintiff appeals from a judgment of nonsuit and dismissal of her complaint. The action is for the wrongful death of plaintiff’s testate who was killed by being run over by defendant’s motor-truck milk-tank combine operated by defendant’s employee at a rural milk plant. Defendant’s employee died prior to the trial and the accident which caused the death was not otherwise witnessed. Plaintiff’s evi[847]*847denee failed to afford a legally permissible inference that a cause of the death was negligence on the part of defendant’s employee. The evidence easily afforded an inference of the accidental means but any inference as to what put the means in motion must necessarily be drawn from other inferences and assumptions equally capable of deductions not incompatible with the absence of such negligence. (Ford V. McAdoo, 231 IT. Y. 155; Francey v. Rutland R. R. Co., 222 IT. Y. 482; Ruback v. McCleary, Wallin & Crouse, 220 IT. Y. 188; White v. Lehigh Valley R. R. Co., 220 N. Y. 131; Scharff V. Jackson, 216 IT. Y. 598; Lopez V. Campbell, 163 N. Y. 340; Ruppert v. Brooklyn Heights R. R. Co., 154 IT. Y. 90; Searles v. Manhattan Railway Co., 101 IT. Y. 661.) Judgment affirmed, without costs. All concur.

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

Plaintiff appeals from a judgment of nonsuit and dismissal of her complaint. The action is for the wrongful death of plaintiff’s testate who was killed by being run over by defendant’s motor-truck milk-tank combine operated by defendant’s employee at a rural milk plant. Defendant’s employee died prior to the trial and the accident which caused the death was not otherwise witnessed. Plaintiff’s evi[847]*847denee failed to afford a legally permissible inference that a cause of the death was negligence on the part of defendant’s employee. The evidence easily afforded an inference of the accidental means but any inference as to what put the means in motion must necessarily be drawn from other inferences and assumptions equally capable of deductions not incompatible with the absence of such negligence. (Ford V. McAdoo, 231 IT. Y. 155; Francey v. Rutland R. R. Co., 222 IT. Y. 482; Ruback v. McCleary, Wallin & Crouse, 220 IT. Y. 188; White v. Lehigh Valley R. R. Co., 220 N. Y. 131; Scharff V. Jackson, 216 IT. Y. 598; Lopez V. Campbell, 163 N. Y. 340; Ruppert v. Brooklyn Heights R. R. Co., 154 IT. Y. 90; Searles v. Manhattan Railway Co., 101 IT. Y. 661.) Judgment affirmed, without costs. All concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

272 A.D.2d 846, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ockerman-v-johnson-nyappdiv-1947.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack