Legal Opinion
Needham v. Interborough Rapid Transit Co.
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York
Decided November 3, 1905PublishedCited by 2 opinions
Appeal from Municipal Court, Borough of Manhattan, Seventh Dis1 trict. Action by Joseph W. Needham against the Interborough Rapid Transit Company. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals.
1Opinion of the CourtScott, P. J.
There was no proof of negligence. All that is testified to is by the plaintiff that as he walked towards the door the train came to a “sudden stop” and he was thrown down. This is not sufficient to justify the inference that defendant or any of its servants were negligent. The complaint should have been dismissed. Black v. Third Ave. R. R. Co., 2 App. Div. 387, 37 N. Y. Supp. 830.
Judgment reversed, and new trial granted, with costs to appellant to abide the event. All concur.
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Black v. Third Avenue RailroadAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1896
3Cited by2 opinions
- De Yoe v. Seattle Electric Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1909
- Gillmore v. Interborough Rapid Transit Co.Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1909