Warren v. Union Railway Co.

46 A.D. 517, 61 N.Y.S. 1009
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJanuary 15, 1900
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 46 A.D. 517 (Warren v. Union Railway Co.) 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
Warren v. Union Railway Co., 46 A.D. 517, 61 N.Y.S. 1009 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1900).

Opinion

Rumsey, J.:

The action was brought to recover damages for injuries suffered by the plaintiff because of a collision between the wagon on which he was riding and á car of the defendant. The evidence would have warranted the jury in finding that the plaintiff, seated in a grocery wagon,' the back and sides of which were inclosed by oilcloth curtains, was driving along White Plains avenue in the city of New York. The defendant’s track was laid in the center of the street. Each side of the street was either out of repair or incumbered with rubbish, so that the passable part of the roadway ran so close to the defendant’s track that the wheel of the plaintiff’s wagon nearest the track was only about a foot from it.. As he was driving in that place, a trolley car of the defendant’s came up rapidly from behind without [518]*518any warning, struck the wagon in whicli the plaintiff was sitting, threw it over, and inflicted" serious injury upon him.

At the. conclusion of the plaintiff’s evidence, which tended to ■establish the foregoing facts, the complaint was dismissed by the "trial court. This is clearly error within the principles established "in the case of Rooks v. The Houston, West Street & Pavonia Feffy R. R. Co. (10 App. Div. 98).

■ A few of the rulings of the court with regard to the admission '■of evidence, which were excepted to,, were erroneous, but in view -of the conclusion we have reached as to the merits, it is not necessary to consider these separate rulings.

■ The judgment and order must be reversed and a new trial granted, "with costs to the appellant to abide the event.

Van Brunt, P. J., Patterson, O’Brien and Ingraham, JJ., concurred.

Judgment and order reversed, new trial ordered, •costs to appellant ;to abide event.

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

Related

Mapes v. Union Railroad
67 N.Y.S. 358 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1900)
Mapes v. Union Railway Co.
56 A.D. 508 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1900)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
46 A.D. 517, 61 N.Y.S. 1009, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/warren-v-union-railway-co-nyappdiv-1900.