Roome v. Coney Island & Brooklyn Railroad

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Roome v. Coney Island & Brooklyn Railroad

150 N.Y.S. 1110, 165 A.D. 929, 1914 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9088

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

DecidedNovember 13, 1914

StatusPublished

This text of 150 N.Y.S. 1110 (Roome v. Coney Island & Brooklyn Railroad) 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

Roome v. Coney Island & Brooklyn Railroad, 150 N.Y.S. 1110, 165 A.D. 929, 1914 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9088 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1914).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In view of the condition of the weather, it cannot be decided that plaintiff was negligent per se in failing to discover the car. But if plaintiff failed to see a car in plain view for over 100 feet, except as the storm intervened, by what rule of law may the defendant, having within the block the paramount right to the track, be deemed negligent for colliding with plaintiff in the middle of the track, where it uncontradictedly appears that the car was run at moderate or slow speed, and the bell sounded before the accident? For the reason that negligence on the part of the defendant is not shown, the judgment is unanimously affirmed, with costs.

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

PER CURIAM.

In view of the condition of the weather, it cannot be decided that plaintiff was negligent per se in failing to discover the car. But if plaintiff failed to see a car in plain view for over 100 feet, except as the storm intervened, by what rule of law may the defendant, having within the block the paramount right to the track, be deemed negligent for colliding with plaintiff in the middle of the track, where it uncontradictedly appears that the car was run at moderate or slow speed, and the bell sounded before the accident? For the reason that negligence on the part of the defendant is not shown, the judgment is unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

150 N.Y.S. 1110, 165 A.D. 929, 1914 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9088, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/roome-v-coney-island-brooklyn-railroad-nyappdiv-1914.