Supple v. International Railway Co.

208 A.D. 547, 203 N.Y.S. 749, 1924 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5086
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMarch 26, 1924
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 208 A.D. 547 (Supple v. International Railway 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
Supple v. International Railway Co., 208 A.D. 547, 203 N.Y.S. 749, 1924 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5086 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1924).

Opinion

Sears, J.:

The plaintiff seeks to recover damages against the defendant, which operates a street railway, for an assault upon him committed by a motorman in defendant’s employ. Liability is dependent upon the relation of carrier and passenger existing between the defendant and plaintiff at the time of the assault. (Stewart v. Brooklyn & Crosstown R. R. Co., 90 N. Y. 588.)

Although it is true that the plaintiff in testifying gave different versions of the details of the transaction, it remained a question for the jury to determine which version was correct. (Ochs v. Woods, 221 N. Y. 335.)

There is evidence in the plaintiff’s testimony that the plaintiff, while standing on the street near the front platform of a car of defendant’s, called the attention of the motorman, who was on board the car, to a hot journal, and although the motorman replied in an insulting manner the plaintiff took the remark as having been intended jokingly, and when the motorman opened the door leading to the front platform of the car, the plaintiff, with the intention of boarding as a passenger, started to get on the car and in so doing [548]*548put his foot upon the first step when the motorman kicked him in the face. The evidence was sufficient to require a submission to the jury of the question whether the plaintiff was a passenger at the time of the assault. (Garricott v. N. Y. State Railways, 223 N. Y. 9.)

The judgment should be reversed and a new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide the event.

All concur.

Judgment and order reversed on the law 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

Related

Barad v. New York Rapid Transit Corp.
162 Misc. 458 (City of New York Municipal Court, 1937)
Trebitsch v. Goelet Leasing Co.
226 A.D. 567 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1929)
Lewin v. Moody
131 Misc. 833 (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 1928)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
208 A.D. 547, 203 N.Y.S. 749, 1924 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5086, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/supple-v-international-railway-co-nyappdiv-1924.