Legal Opinion

Hessner v. Delaware & Hudson Railway Co.

New York Court of Appeals

Decided February 19, 1976PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Memorandum. The order of the Appellate Division is affirmed, with costs. The record contains sufficient evidence to support the jury’s finding of negligence on the part of defendant in that the plaintiff operator and two disinterested witnesses testified that no bell, horn, whistle or warning was sounded as the train approached the crossing. It is noteworthy, indeed, that the sole dissenter at the Appellate Division found that the question of defendant’s negligence was properly submitted as a fact issue to be resolved by the jury. However, we are unable to agree with the dissenter that…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Dolfini v. . Erie R.R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1904

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Miller v. Town of FentonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1998
  2. Merenda v. Consolidated Rail Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1998
  3. E. Mower & Son, Inc. v. Consolidated Rail Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1998
  4. Gilliard v. Long Island RailroadAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1978

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API