Legal Opinion

Meyer v. Whisnant

New York Court of Appeals

Decided July 14, 1954PublishedCited by 24 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDesmond, J.

The dismissal of the complaints as against defendant-respondent Whisnant should be affirmed. The sudden, unanticipated and unexplained dash of the Bien car, across the highway and into Whisnant’s path, made him the helpless victim of what was, beyond any dispute, an emergency with the creation of which Whisnant had nothing to do. Such violations as Whisnant may have been guilty of were no proof of negligent causation by him, since there was no possible logical connection between any of them, and the accident (see Brown v. Shyne, 242 N. Y. 176, 180; Tedla v. Ellman, 280 N. Y. 124; Hagadorn v.…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Brown v. ShyneNew York Court of Appeals · 1926
  2. Tedla v. EllmanNew York Court of Appeals · 1939
  3. Hagadorn v. Socony-Vacuum Oil Company, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1949
  4. Goldblatt v. TabaccoNew York Court of Appeals · 1949

3Cited by24 opinions

  1. Wartels v. County Asphalt, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1972
  2. Gouchie v. GillAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1993
  3. Tenenbaum v. MartinAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1987
  4. Rowlands v. ParksNew York Court of Appeals · 1956
  5. Palmer v. PalmerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1969

19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API