Westerman v. Metropolitan Street Railway Co.

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Westerman v. Metropolitan Street Railway Co.

84 N.Y.S. 501

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedNovember 6, 1903

StatusPublished

This text of 84 N.Y.S. 501 (Westerman v. Metropolitan Street Railway Co.) 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

Westerman v. Metropolitan Street Railway Co., 84 N.Y.S. 501 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1903).

Pincite

Opinion

BISCHOFF, J.

The jury could properly find from the evidence that the car had stopped at a point half a block away when the wagon approached the track in the course of an attempt to cross. The path taken was diagonal; hence the inference that the car overtook the wagon is permissible, and there is no improbability in the account given by plaintiff’s witness that the car proceeded 85 feet while the wagon was thus making a diagonal crossing. Concededly, negligence of the driver of the wagon was not to be imputed to the plaintiff, and his failure to look for the car was not necessarily an act of negligence. The place was not a place of obvious danger, as at a railway crossing, and the position of the car was such that, had he looked, danger in the attempt to cross was not apparent, according to acceptable evidence. Therefore the jury could find, as a matter of reasonable inference, that there was no contributory negligence. Lane v. Brooklyn Heights R. R. Co., 85 App. Div. 89, 82 N. Y. Supp. 1057.

Judgment affirmed, with costs. All concur

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

BISCHOFF, J.

The jury could properly find from the evidence that the car had stopped at a point half a block away when the wagon approached the track in the course of an attempt to cross. The path taken was diagonal; hence the inference that the car overtook the wagon is permissible, and there is no improbability in the account given by plaintiff’s witness that the car proceeded 85 feet while the wagon was thus making a diagonal crossing. Concededly, negligence of the driver of the wagon was not to be imputed to the plaintiff, and his failure to look for the car was not necessarily an act of negligence. The place was not a place of obvious danger, as at a railway crossing, and the position of the car was such that, had he looked, danger in the attempt to cross was not apparent, according to acceptable evidence. Therefore the jury could find, as a matter of reasonable inference, that there was no contributory negligence. Lane v. Brooklyn Heights R. R. Co., 85 App. Div. 89, 82 N. Y. Supp. 1057.

Judgment affirmed, with costs. All concur

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

84 N.Y.S. 501, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/westerman-v-metropolitan-street-railway-co-nyappterm-1903.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack