Mangan v. Hudson River Telephone Co.
New York Supreme Court
Demurrer to complaint by the defendant illuminating company.
1Opinion of the CourtSpencer, J.
Plaintiffs allege that their intestate was killed by reason of the concurrent negligence of the defendants. The defendant illuminating company demurs on three grounds. First, that two causes of action are improperly united; second, that there is a defect of parties defendant; and third, the complaint does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action against the demurrant.
The first ground of demurrer is held insufficient on the authority of Lynch v. Elektron Mfg. Co., 94 App. Div. 408. As to the second, there are no facts alleged which justify an inference that the railroad…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Larmore v. . Crown Point Iron Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1886
- Perham v. Portland Electric Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1898
- Illingsworth v. Boston Electric Light Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1894
- Hector v. Boston Electric Light Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1894
- Lee v. . Troy Citizens' Gas-Light Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1885
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Musolf v. Duluth Edison Electric Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1909
- Ader v. BlauAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1925