Legal Opinion · Dissent

Smith v. Winston

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided November 15, 1914Published

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, entered in the Ulster county clerk’s office on the 3d day of March, 1914, and also from an order denying the defendants’ motion for a new trial made upon the minutes. Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. All concurred, except Woodward, J., dissenting, in opinion.

1Dissent

Woodward, J: (dissenting):

I dissent. Although the complaint devotes two printed pages to detailing the alleged negligence of the defendants, there is not a suggestion in it of the disregard of any of the matters which would bring the ease within the Employers’ Liability Act.* There is no *939suggestion of any neglect on the part of the superintendent or other person performing the duties of a superintendent, in respect to any matters of superintendence, nor is there any claim of any defect in the ways, works, machinery or plant of the defendants, who were engaged in reconstructing a railroad…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. La Duke v. Hudson River Telephone Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1908
  2. Holm v. Empire Hardware Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1905

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

Powered by the Exa API