Legal Opinion
Kent v. Town of Patterson
New York Supreme Court
Decided May 15, 1913PublishedCited by 2 opinions
Action for negligence.
1Opinion of the CourtMorschauser, J.
This action is for negligence against the town, and if the highway commissioner was not negligent in the conduct of his management of the highways then the action must fail.
The plaintiff relies on the alleged negligence of the highway commissioner in placing two stones that had been taken out of the beaten path and placed upon the side of the highway and that frightened plaintiff’s, horse. *561causing it to run away and throw the plaintiff out of the wagon, from which he sustained injuries. This is the charge made against the defendant. On the trial the plaintiff made proof as to the alleged…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Devlin v. . SmithNew York Court of Appeals · 1882
- H.M. Filer v. . New York Central R.R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1872
- Hemmens v. . NelsonNew York Court of Appeals · 1893
- Burke v. . WitherbeeNew York Court of Appeals · 1885
- Hubbell v. . City of YonkersNew York Court of Appeals · 1887
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- McComb v. C. A. Swanson & SonsDistrict Court, D. Nebraska · 1948
- Kent v. Town of PattersonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1914