Trudell v. New York Rapid Transit Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Trudell v. New York Rapid Transit Corp.

260 A.D. 931, 23 N.Y.S.2d 35, 1940 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5506

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

DecidedNovember 4, 1940

StatusPublished

This text of 260 A.D. 931 (Trudell v. New York Rapid Transit Corp.) 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

Trudell v. New York Rapid Transit Corp., 260 A.D. 931, 23 N.Y.S.2d 35, 1940 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5506 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1940).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action brought to recover damages resulting from the death of plaintiff’s intestate, a twelve-year old boy, who fell from the rear platform of one of defendant’s elevated trains, judgment in favor of plaintiff unanimously affirmed, with costs. The evidence taken at the second trial differed in no important respect from that taken at the first. The Court of Appeals has held that the evidence taken at the first trial was sufficient to create issues of fact for the jury and that it was error to direct a verdict for the defendant. (Trudell v. N. Y. Rapid Transit Corp., 281 N. Y. 82.) On substantially the same evidence the court at the second trial was obliged to submit the issues to the jury, and we cannot say that the verdict was against the weight of the evidence. Present — Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Johnston, Adel and Close, JJ.

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

In an action brought to recover damages resulting from the death of plaintiff’s intestate, a twelve-year old boy, who fell from the rear platform of one of defendant’s elevated trains, judgment in favor of plaintiff unanimously affirmed, with costs. The evidence taken at the second trial differed in no important respect from that taken at the first. The Court of Appeals has held that the evidence taken at the first trial was sufficient to create issues of fact for the jury and that it was error to direct a verdict for the defendant. (Trudell v. N. Y. Rapid Transit Corp., 281 N. Y. 82.) On substantially the same evidence the court at the second trial was obliged to submit the issues to the jury, and we cannot say that the verdict was against the weight of the evidence. Present — Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Johnston, Adel and Close, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

260 A.D. 931, 23 N.Y.S.2d 35, 1940 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5506, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/trudell-v-new-york-rapid-transit-corp-nyappdiv-1940.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack