Legal Opinion

Senecal v. Drollette

New York Court of Appeals

Decided October 23, 1952PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDesmond, J.

The infant plaintiff, crossing a rural highway a.t night, was struck and injured by an automobile which, the complaint alleged, had been negligently driven by defendant. Defendant denied the occurrence but, in his testimony, admitted that his car had, at about the time and place of plaintiff’s injury, come into collision with some object. Plaintiff’s first burden of proof, therefore, was to identify the automobile with which he had come into contact. Plaintiff himself, a ten-year-old boy, was unable to make that identification, but, as his witnesses, he produced two twelve-year-old boy…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. People v. . RoachNew York Court of Appeals · 1915
  2. Mahoney v. GoochMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1923
  3. Gray v. . Brooklyn Heights R.R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1903
  4. People v. SpinelloNew York Court of Appeals · 1951
  5. People v. . DeaconsNew York Court of Appeals · 1888

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Soto v. New York City Transit AuthorityNew York Court of Appeals · 2006
  2. People v. OlsenNew York Court of Appeals · 1968
  3. People v. RussellAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1991
  4. People v. DusingNew York Court of Appeals · 1959
  5. People v. HeyserNew York Court of Appeals · 1957

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API