Robbins v. New York City Railway Co.

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Robbins v. New York City Railway Co.

50 Misc. 625, 98 N.Y.S. 198

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedMarch 15, 1906

StatusPublished

This text of 50 Misc. 625 (Robbins v. New York City Railway Co.) 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

Robbins v. New York City Railway Co., 50 Misc. 625, 98 N.Y.S. 198 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1906).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Under the rule laid down in McDonald v. Metropolitan St. R. Co., 167 N. Y. 66, if there be any evidence at all from which defendant’s negligence or the plaintiff’s freedom from contributory negligence can be inferred, the question becomes one of fact and must, in the first instance, be submitted to the jury, leaving to the court, if it finds the verdict unsupported by the evidence, only the power to set aside the verdict and order another trial. There was some evidence in this case from which inferences as to the respective negligence of plaintiff and defendant might have been drawn in plaintiff’s favor; and it was, therefore, error to have dismissed the complaint. Whether, upon the evidence, a verdict in favor of plaintiff would have been sustained is another question, with which we are not concerned •on this appeal.

Present: Scott, O’Gorman and Newburger, JJ.

Judgment reversed and new trial granted, 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.

Under the rule laid down in McDonald v. Metropolitan St. R. Co., 167 N. Y. 66, if there be any evidence at all from which defendant’s negligence or the plaintiff’s freedom from contributory negligence can be inferred, the question becomes one of fact and must, in the first instance, be submitted to the jury, leaving to the court, if it finds the verdict unsupported by the evidence, only the power to set aside the verdict and order another trial. There was some evidence in this case from which inferences as to the respective negligence of plaintiff and defendant might have been drawn in plaintiff’s favor; and it was, therefore, error to have dismissed the complaint. Whether, upon the evidence, a verdict in favor of plaintiff would have been sustained is another question, with which we are not concerned •on this appeal.

Present: Scott, O’Gorman and Newburger, JJ.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

50 Misc. 625, 98 N.Y.S. 198, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/robbins-v-new-york-city-railway-co-nyappterm-1906.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack