Tremaine v. Joline

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Tremaine v. Joline

145 N.Y.S. 46

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedDecember 30, 1913

StatusPublished

This text of 145 N.Y.S. 46 (Tremaine v. Joline) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Tremaine v. Joline, 145 N.Y.S. 46 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1913).

Pincite

Opinion

SEABURY, J.

This is an action to recover damages to an automobile, alleged to have been caused through the negligencevof the servants of the defendants. Plaintiff’s chauffeur, while operating a large automobile on Madison avenue, turned on the south-bound track and continued toward a rapidly approaching south-bound car. When the car and the automobile were close together, the chauffeur turned onto the north-bound track and was struck by the north-bound car. When the automobile was turned onto the north-bound track, the north-bound car was within a few feet of the automobile. The accident was obviously the result of the negligence of the plaintiff’s chauffeur. The carelessness and recklessness of the chauffeur is apparent from his own testimony, as well as from the testimony of several other witnesses in the case.

Judgment is reversed, with costs, and complaint dismissed, with costs. All concur.

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

SEABURY, J.

This is an action to recover damages to an automobile, alleged to have been caused through the negligencevof the servants of the defendants. Plaintiff’s chauffeur, while operating a large automobile on Madison avenue, turned on the south-bound track and continued toward a rapidly approaching south-bound car. When the car and the automobile were close together, the chauffeur turned onto the north-bound track and was struck by the north-bound car. When the automobile was turned onto the north-bound track, the north-bound car was within a few feet of the automobile. The accident was obviously the result of the negligence of the plaintiff’s chauffeur. The carelessness and recklessness of the chauffeur is apparent from his own testimony, as well as from the testimony of several other witnesses in the case.

Judgment is reversed, with costs, and complaint dismissed, with costs. All concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

145 N.Y.S. 46, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tremaine-v-joline-nyappterm-1913.