Schwartz v. Kraft

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Schwartz v. Kraft

253 A.D. 736, 300 N.Y.S. 645, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5379

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

DecidedDecember 10, 1937

StatusPublished

This text of 253 A.D. 736 (Schwartz v. Kraft) 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

Schwartz v. Kraft, 253 A.D. 736, 300 N.Y.S. 645, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5379 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1937).

Pincite

Opinion

While riding as a guest passenger in an automobile, the plaintiff, then an infant, sustained personal injuries resulting from a collision between the automobile and wooden horses surrounding an excavation in the highway under repair. The record indicates that there were no lights or warning signs on the obstruction, and that the driver was negligent. In this action to recover damages the trial justice dismissed the complaint at the end of the plaintiff’s case on the ground that plaintiff was guilty of contributory negligence. Judgment reversed on the law and a new trial granted, with costs to appellant to abide the event. As the record stands, the question of plaintiff’s contributory negligence was one of fact that should have been submitted to the jury. (Nelson v. Nygren, 259 N. Y. 71, 75, 76.) Hagarty, Davis, Adel, Taylor and Close, JJ.,' concur.

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

While riding as a guest passenger in an automobile, the plaintiff, then an infant, sustained personal injuries resulting from a collision between the automobile and wooden horses surrounding an excavation in the highway under repair. The record indicates that there were no lights or warning signs on the obstruction, and that the driver was negligent. In this action to recover damages the trial justice dismissed the complaint at the end of the plaintiff’s case on the ground that plaintiff was guilty of contributory negligence. Judgment reversed on the law and a new trial granted, with costs to appellant to abide the event. As the record stands, the question of plaintiff’s contributory negligence was one of fact that should have been submitted to the jury. (Nelson v. Nygren, 259 N. Y. 71, 75, 76.) Hagarty, Davis, Adel, Taylor and Close, JJ.,' concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

253 A.D. 736, 300 N.Y.S. 645, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5379, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/schwartz-v-kraft-nyappdiv-1937.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack