Breil v. . City of Buffalo
New York Court of Appeals
Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme ■•Oourt in the fifth judicial department, entered upon an order made at the January term, 1893, which affirmed a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict and also affirmed an order denying a motion for a new trial.
Read the full summary
Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme ■•Oourt in the fifth judicial department, entered upon an order made at the January term, 1893, which affirmed a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict and also affirmed an order denying a motion for a new trial. This action was brought to recover damages for injuries received by plaintiff through the overturning of a carriage in which she was riding in the night time by colliding with a pile of dirt, which plaintiff alleged defendant negligently allowed to remain on one of its streets for a considerable time, without…
1Opinion of the CourtPeckham, J.
A careful perusal of all the evidence in this case leads us to the conclusion that the plaintiff failed to make out a cause of action against the defendant, and that the defendant’s motion for a non-suit should, therefore, have been granted.
The evidence, in substance, is that the dirt was brought to the street opposite the house of Mr. Franklin and was there unloaded and was thert drawn in wheelbarrows into the yard belonging to him. There were three men engaged in wheeling it away most of the time. The dirt that was drawn to the street was thus being continually drawn away for the purpose of…
2Cited by8 opinions
- City of Louisville v. LenehanCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1912
- City of Harrodsburg v. SalleeCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1911
- Johnson v. City of PoughkeepsieAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1898
- Briel v. City of BuffaloNew York Supreme Court · 1895
- Connors v. Elmira, C. & N. RailroadNew York Supreme Court · 1895
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.