Richardson v. Erie Railroad Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Richardson v. Erie Railroad Co.

269 A.D. 805, 55 N.Y.S.2d 478, 1945 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3929

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

DecidedMay 2, 1945

StatusPublished

This text of 269 A.D. 805 (Richardson v. Erie Railroad 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

Richardson v. Erie Railroad Co., 269 A.D. 805, 55 N.Y.S.2d 478, 1945 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3929 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1945).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment reversed on the law and a new trial granted, with costs to the appellant to abide the event. Memorandum: Upon the plaintiff’s proof and particularly the testimony as to the failure of the wigwag signals to operate, we think there was sufficient to take the case to the jury. (Carr v. Pennsylvania R. R. Co., 225 N. Y. 44; Elias v. Lehigh Valley R. R. Co., 226 N. Y. 154; Hand v. Delaware, Lackawanna & Western R. R. Co., 267 App. Div. 1037, affd. 293 N. Y. 845.) All concur, except Love, J., who dissents and votes for affirmance. (The judgment dismisses the complaint at close of plaintiff’s case in an action for damages for personal injuries arising out of a collision between an automobile and a freight train.) Present — Taylor, P. J., Dowling, McCurn, Larkin and Love, JJ.

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

Judgment reversed on the law and a new trial granted, with costs to the appellant to abide the event. Memorandum: Upon the plaintiff’s proof and particularly the testimony as to the failure of the wigwag signals to operate, we think there was sufficient to take the case to the jury. (Carr v. Pennsylvania R. R. Co., 225 N. Y. 44; Elias v. Lehigh Valley R. R. Co., 226 N. Y. 154; Hand v. Delaware, Lackawanna & Western R. R. Co., 267 App. Div. 1037, affd. 293 N. Y. 845.) All concur, except Love, J., who dissents and votes for affirmance. (The judgment dismisses the complaint at close of plaintiff’s case in an action for damages for personal injuries arising out of a collision between an automobile and a freight train.) Present — Taylor, P. J., Dowling, McCurn, Larkin and Love, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

269 A.D. 805, 55 N.Y.S.2d 478, 1945 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3929, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/richardson-v-erie-railroad-co-nyappdiv-1945.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack