O'Neill v. City of Port Jervis

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

O'Neill v. City of Port Jervis

227 A.D. 740, 236 N.Y.S. 860

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

DecidedOctober 15, 1929

StatusPublished

This text of 227 A.D. 740 (O'Neill v. City of Port Jervis) 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

O'Neill v. City of Port Jervis, 227 A.D. 740, 236 N.Y.S. 860 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1929).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment affirmed, with costs. We are of opinion that on the facts presented by the record the alleged illegal obstruction was not the proximate cause of the accident. Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty and Carswell, JJ., concur; Young and Seeger, JJ., dissent and vote to reverse and for a new trial upon the ground that the evidence was sufficient to justify a finding that the obstruction in the street was a nuisance for which both the owner and the city were responsible. (Sweet v. Perkins, 196 N. Y. 482.)

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

Judgment affirmed, with costs. We are of opinion that on the facts presented by the record the alleged illegal obstruction was not the proximate cause of the accident. Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty and Carswell, JJ., concur; Young and Seeger, JJ., dissent and vote to reverse and for a new trial upon the ground that the evidence was sufficient to justify a finding that the obstruction in the street was a nuisance for which both the owner and the city were responsible. (Sweet v. Perkins, 196 N. Y. 482.)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

227 A.D. 740, 236 N.Y.S. 860, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/oneill-v-city-of-port-jervis-nyappdiv-1929.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack