Masterson v. . N.Y.C. H.R.R.R. Co.

As to the general principles of law applicable to this case there is no room for argument. It was the defendant's duty to keep its road-bed at the street-crossing in such condition that a traveler could pass over it in safety, or failing in this, make compensation to a person injured by reason of its omission, unless he was so deficient in reasonable and ordinary care that he brought the accident upon himself. (Laws of 1850, chap. 140, § 28, sub. 5; Cott v. Lewiston R.R. Co., 36 N.Y. 214; Gale v.N.Y.C. H.R.R.R. Co., 76 id. 594.) That the plaintiff's intestate was lawfully upon this crossing…