Legal Opinion
Whitcher v. Board of Education
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided June 30, 1931PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtVan Kirk, P. J.
It was prejudicial error to introduce the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur. That doctrine does not apply to this case. The circumstances of the accident and the injury do not identify the wrongdoer. (Hardie v. Boland Co., 205 N. Y. 336.) They, unexplained, do not identify this defendant as the solely negligent party. (Plumb v. Richmond Light & R. R. Co., 195 App. Div. 254; affd., 233 N. Y. 285.) It may not even be said that the breaking of this glass is evidence that there was negligence on the part of some one. There may have been causes for the breaking of this glass other than those for which…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Herman v. . Board of EducationNew York Court of Appeals · 1922
- Plumb v. . Richmond Light R.R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1922
- Hardie v. Charles P. Boland Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1912
- Johnson v. Board of EducationAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1924
- Plump v. Richmond Light & RailroadAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1921
3Cited by14 opinions
- Abbott v. Page Airways, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1969
- Bressler v. New York Rapid Transit Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1936
- Goodheart v. American Airlines, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1937
- Citrola v. Eastern Air Lines, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1959
- Holtfoth v. Rochester General HospitalNew York Court of Appeals · 1952
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.