Legal Opinion

Muller v. Manhattan Railway Co.

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Decided November 15, 1905PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the City Court of the city of New York, entered on the verdict of a jury in favor of the plaintiff.

1Opinion of the CourtScott, J.

The defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint should have been granted. The plaintiff, traveling in one of defendant’s cars, wished to alight at Eorty-second street. As the train approached that street, the conductor announced it and plaintiff arose and went to the door, preparatory to alighting when' the train should stop. He put his hand on the jamb of the doorway and, as he says, “ through the sudden stop of the train, I bruised my hand when the door slammed.” This is the only evidence as to hów the accident came to happen. No reason is given why the plaintiff should have put his hand on…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cited by2 opinions

  1. Gillmore v. Interborough Rapid Transit Co.Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1909
  2. Rodriguez v. Interborough Rapid Transit Co.Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1914

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

Powered by the Exa API