Smith v. Utica Knitting Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Smith v. Utica Knitting Co.

84 N.Y.S. 1146

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

DecidedOctober 27, 1903

StatusPublished

This text of 84 N.Y.S. 1146 (Smith v. Utica Knitting 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

Smith v. Utica Knitting Co., 84 N.Y.S. 1146 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1903).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Judgment and order reversed, and new trial ordered, with costs to the appellant to abide event, upon questions of law only, the facts having been examined and no error found therein, upon the ground that the evidence does not show that plaintiff’s intestate was free from contributory negligence, and the further ground that the plaintiff’s intestate assumed the risk.

WILLIAMS and NASH, JJ„ vote for reversal upon the law and the facts, upon the ground that the finding of the jury that there was absence of contributory negligence was contrary to the evidence, and the finding that the defendant was guilty of negligence was contrary to the evidence, because the defendant, under the circumstances of the case, owed the intestate no duty to have its elevator in different condition from what it was; he having assumed the risk thereof.

STOVER, J., not voting.

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

PER CURIAM.

Judgment and order reversed, and new trial ordered, with costs to the appellant to abide event, upon questions of law only, the facts having been examined and no error found therein, upon the ground that the evidence does not show that plaintiff’s intestate was free from contributory negligence, and the further ground that the plaintiff’s intestate assumed the risk.

WILLIAMS and NASH, JJ„ vote for reversal upon the law and the facts, upon the ground that the finding of the jury that there was absence of contributory negligence was contrary to the evidence, and the finding that the defendant was guilty of negligence was contrary to the evidence, because the defendant, under the circumstances of the case, owed the intestate no duty to have its elevator in different condition from what it was; he having assumed the risk thereof.

STOVER, J., not voting.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

84 N.Y.S. 1146, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smith-v-utica-knitting-co-nyappdiv-1903.