Vorce v. Murray
This text of 143 A.D. 962 (Vorce v. Murray) 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.
Opinion
It is fair to assume from the record that the walk in question was the means of access to Mrs. Murray’s house which the plaintiff was visiting. It was also the means of access to other tenements and premises owned by the defendant and apparently she had charge of it. The defendant, therefore, owed a duty to him. The judgment is, therefore, reversed and a new trial granted, with costs to the appellant to abide the event. All concurred, except Sewell and Houghton, JJ., dissenting. Judgment reversed 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
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
143 A.D. 962, 128 N.Y.S. 528, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/vorce-v-murray-nyappdiv-1911.