Legal Opinion
Casey v. New York Central & Hudson River R. R.
New York Court of Common Pleas
Decided February 3, 1879PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Charles P. Daly, Chief Justice.
The motion for a non-suit was properly denied. There was sufficient proof of negligence on the part of the defendant’s employees, and the question of co-operative negligence on the part of the girl was, upon that testimony, a question of fact for the jury. For all that appears in the evidence, the girl may, before she attempted to cross the street, have looked in either direction to see if there were approaching cars; and the approach of the engine was so rapid, and at such an unusual rate of speed, according to the testimony of the plaintiff’s witnesses, that…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Reynolds v. New York Central & Hudson River RailroadNew York Court of Appeals · 1874
- Anderson v. Rome, Watertown & Ogdensburgh RailroadNew York Court of Appeals · 1873
- Beisiegel v. New York Central RailroadNew York Court of Appeals · 1869
- McGrath v. . N.Y. Cen. H.R.R.R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1875
- McGrath v. New York Central & Hudson River RailroadNew York Court of Appeals · 1876
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Metcalfe v. Rochester Railway Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1896
- Stever v. New York Central & Hudson River RailroadAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1896
- Hooghkirk v. President of the Delaware & Hudson Canal Co.New York Supreme Court · 1881
- Metcalfe v. Rochester Railway Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1896
- Curtis v. Hudson Valley Railway Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1911