Swift v. City of New York

New York Court of Appeals

Swift v. City of New York

200 N.E. 681, 270 N.Y. 162, 1936 N.Y. LEXIS 1526

CourtNew York Court of Appeals

DecidedMarch 3, 1936

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 200 N.E. 681 (Swift v. City of New York) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Swift v. City of New York, 200 N.E. 681, 270 N.Y. 162, 1936 N.Y. LEXIS 1526 (N.Y. 1936).

Pincite

Opinion

*165 Per Curiam.

There is no evidence that defendant was chargeable with notice of special danger to children from existing conditions. (Johnson v. City of New York, 208 N. Y. 77; McDonald v. Degnon-McLean Cont. Co., 124 App. Div. 824; affd., 205 N. Y. 502.) The ordinance was intended for the protection of persons traveling on the highway in the usual manner, and even, if applicable to the facts in this case, its violation is not shown to have been the proximate cause of plaintiff’s injury. No causal connection is shown.

The judgment of the Appellate Division and that of the Trial Term should be reversed and the complaint dismissed, with costs in all courts.

Crane, Ch. J., Lehman, O’Brien, Hubbs, Crouch, Loughran and Finch, JJ., concur. Judgments reversed, etc.

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

*165 Per Curiam.

There is no evidence that defendant was chargeable with notice of special danger to children from existing conditions. (Johnson v. City of New York, 208 N. Y. 77; McDonald v. Degnon-McLean Cont. Co., 124 App. Div. 824; affd., 205 N. Y. 502.) The ordinance was intended for the protection of persons traveling on the highway in the usual manner, and even, if applicable to the facts in this case, its violation is not shown to have been the proximate cause of plaintiff’s injury. No causal connection is shown.

The judgment of the Appellate Division and that of the Trial Term should be reversed and the complaint dismissed, with costs in all courts.

Crane, Ch. J., Lehman, O’Brien, Hubbs, Crouch, Loughran and Finch, JJ., concur. Judgments reversed, etc.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

200 N.E. 681, 270 N.Y. 162, 1936 N.Y. LEXIS 1526, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/swift-v-city-of-new-york-ny-1936.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack