Utess v. Erie Railroad

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Utess v. Erie Railroad

138 A.D. 914

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Utess v. Erie Railroad. Read the opinion of the Court — 131 A.D. 447 →

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided May 15, 1910·Published

Opinion

Judgmeht and order affirmed, with costs. All concurred, except McLennan, P. J., and Williams, J., who dissented upon the ground that the-engineer in charge of the train was not shown guilty of negligence which caused or contributed to the injury, arid that in any event the proof "does not bring the case within the provisions-of the Barnes Act.

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

Judgmeht and order affirmed, with costs. All concurred, except McLennan, P. J., and Williams, J., who dissented upon the ground that the-engineer in charge of the train was not shown guilty of negligence which caused or contributed to the injury, arid that in any event the proof "does not bring the case within the provisions-of the Barnes Act.

Utess v. Erie Railroad, 138 A.D. 914 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1910).

Pincite

138 A.D. 914 (Utess v. Erie Railroad) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related