Redmond v. Hatch

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Redmond v. Hatch

50 Misc. 643

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedApril 15, 1906

StatusPublished

This text of 50 Misc. 643 (Redmond v. Hatch) 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

Redmond v. Hatch, 50 Misc. 643 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1906).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The testimony shows that the plaintiff, who was a police officer, while standing at a street crossing, regulating traffic' on the streets, and in such a position that he could not see the defendants’ driver, was knocked down and run over in broad daylight; that the driver of the defendants’ horses had ample room to pass plaintiff without striking him, and that there was nothing to obscure the vision of the driver. The driver was not called on the trial.

We are of the opinion that the plaintiff showed that he was free from contributory negligence, and that the injuries that he received were caused through the negligence of the defendants’ driver.

Judgment appealed from is reversed and a new trial ordered, with costs to the appellant to abide the event.

Present: Scott, Tbuax and Bischoee, JJ.

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

Per Curiam.

The testimony shows that the plaintiff, who was a police officer, while standing at a street crossing, regulating traffic' on the streets, and in such a position that he could not see the defendants’ driver, was knocked down and run over in broad daylight; that the driver of the defendants’ horses had ample room to pass plaintiff without striking him, and that there was nothing to obscure the vision of the driver. The driver was not called on the trial.

We are of the opinion that the plaintiff showed that he was free from contributory negligence, and that the injuries that he received were caused through the negligence of the defendants’ driver.

Judgment appealed from is reversed and a new trial ordered, with costs to the appellant to abide the event.

Present: Scott, Tbuax and Bischoee, JJ.

Judgment reversed and new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide event.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

50 Misc. 643, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/redmond-v-hatch-nyappterm-1906.