Oellrich v. John F. Cogan Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Oellrich v. John F. Cogan Co.

175 A.D. 901, 160 N.Y.S. 1140

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

DecidedOctober 15, 1916

StatusPublished

This text of 175 A.D. 901 (Oellrich v. John F. Cogan Co.) 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

Oellrich v. John F. Cogan Co., 175 A.D. 901, 160 N.Y.S. 1140 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1916).

Pincite

Opinion

The exception at the close of the trial to the ruling that plaintiff should then elect between nuisance and negligence did not present reversible error, since such election then did not harm plaintiff, as the proofs of defendant’s authority from the city to place material on this curb negatived the charge of nuisance. The issues of negligence were properly left to the jury. If that morning the light was sufficient to disclose the presence, as an obstruction, of these planks, when plaintiff stepped down from his wagon and tripped on them, he could not recover. Plaintiff was not entitled to the charge that defendant should also have marked the planks by a red light. The order denying a new trial is, therefore, unanimously affirmed, with costs. Present—Jenks, P. J., Thomas, Carr, Rich and Putnam, JJ.

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

The exception at the close of the trial to the ruling that plaintiff should then elect between nuisance and negligence did not present reversible error, since such election then did not harm plaintiff, as the proofs of defendant’s authority from the city to place material on this curb negatived the charge of nuisance. The issues of negligence were properly left to the jury. If that morning the light was sufficient to disclose the presence, as an obstruction, of these planks, when plaintiff stepped down from his wagon and tripped on them, he could not recover. Plaintiff was not entitled to the charge that defendant should also have marked the planks by a red light. The order denying a new trial is, therefore, unanimously affirmed, with costs. Present—Jenks, P. J., Thomas, Carr, Rich and Putnam, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

175 A.D. 901, 160 N.Y.S. 1140, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/oellrich-v-john-f-cogan-co-nyappdiv-1916.