Hayes v. Forty-second Street & Grand Street Ferry Railroad
New York Court of Appeals
Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court, in the second judicial department, entered upon an order made the second Monday of December, 1881, which affirmed a judgment in favor of. plaintiff, entered upon a ■ verdict, and affirmed an order denying a motion for a new trial.
Read the full summary
Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court, in the second judicial department, entered upon an order made the second Monday of December, 1881, which affirmed a judgment in favor of. plaintiff, entered upon a ■ verdict, and affirmed an order denying a motion for a new trial. This action was brought to recover damages for injuries alleged to have been caused by the negligence of the driver of one of the defendant’s street cars. ■ The material facts are stated in the opinion. ■ Plaintiff was guilty of contributory negligence, having stepped from the platform of the car to the…
1Opinion of the CourtFinch, J.
The defendant company makes two objections to the recovery in this case. Upon proof that the notice required by the General Railroad Act was posted in the car, and that plaintiff was riding upon the platform and was upon the step when injured, in disregard of that notice, his contributory negligence was asserted. In Nolan v. Brooklyn City & Newtown R. R. Co. (87 N. Y. 63) we did not decide that the provision of the General Railroad Act referred to applied to street railroads. It was enough in that case, that if it did, the notice proved was insufficient, and that was the only answer deemed…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Nolan v. . Brooklyn City Newtown R.R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1881
3Cited by4 opinions
- Hughes v. Cincinnati, &c., RailroadCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1891
- Bartley v. Metropolitan Street Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1899
- De Yoe v. Seattle Electric Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1909
- Ely v. Southwest Missouri RailroadMissouri Court of Appeals · 1910