Legal Opinion

Binswanger v. New York Central & Hudson River Railroad

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

Decided May 3, 1905Published

Action by Max Binswanger against New York Central & Hudson River Railroad Company.

1Opinion of the Court

PEE CURIAM.

Plaintiff’s exceptions sustained, and motion for new trial granted, with costs to the plaintiff to abide event. Held, that the questions of defendant’s negligence and the plaintiff’s freedom from contributory negligence were questions of fact for the jury, and that this was practically held by this court upon a former appeal in the same case from an order granting a new trial after a nonsuit (93 App. Div. 604, 86 N. Y. Supp. 1129), following the decision in Brooks v. N. Y. C. and H. R. R. Co., 84 App. Div. 633, 82 N. Y. Supp. 1096. The reasons for the holdings in the cases' herein…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. People ex rel. Clapp v. ListmanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1903
  2. Barnes v. New York Central & Hudson River RailroadNew York Supreme Court · 1904
  3. Brooks v. New York Cent. & H. R. R.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1903

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

Powered by the Exa API