Swift v. City of New York
| Decision Date | 03 March 1936 |
| Citation | 270 N.Y. 162,200 N.E. 681 |
| Parties | SWIFT v. CITY OF NEW YORK et al. |
| Court | New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Action by Doris Swift, an infant, by Sarah Swift, as guardian, etc., against the City of New York and the Bronx Water Works Corporation. From a judgment of the Appellate Division (245 App.Div. 839, 282 N.Y.S. 244), affirming a judgment of the Trial Term on the verdict of a jury for plaintiff, defendant corporation appeals.
Judgments reversed, and complaint dismissed.
The action was brought to recover for personal injuries sustained by the infant plaintiff, aged 7 years, through the alleged negligence of the defendants, and for the loss of her services resulting therefrom.
The complaint alleged, in substance, among other things, that the defendant-appellant, pursuant to a contract with the city of New York, engaged in the installation of water pipes and mains along a certain street in Brooklyn, that, in connection therewith, it caused a trench to be dug between the sidewalk and the car tracks on said street, and that, on September 1, 1931, the infant plaintiff was caused to fall into such trench or excavation because of the failure of the defendant-appellant properly to guard the same.
There was evidence that the infant plaintiff was walking or running upon a pile of dirt alongside the excavation, and that, while thereon, she either slipped, tripped, or the dirt gave way, causing her to fall therefrom, so that she struck the side of a passing trolley car, which threw her into the excavation.
On the trial there was read to the jury section 3 of article 1 of chapter 23 of the Code of Ordinances of the city of New York, which provides in part as follows:
The verdict was rendered against the defendant-appellant alone, the complaint having been dismissed as against the other defendants at the close of the plaintiffs' case.
Appeal from Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second department.
Robert...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Steeves v. City of Rochester
...here since they were ‘intended for the protection of persons traveling on the highway in the usual manner’ (Swift v. City of New Yokr, 270 N.Y. 162, 165, 200 N.E. 681, 682), we think they are some evidence that lamps rather than pot torches were considered the proper method of illumination ......
-
Salsbury v. United Parcel Serv.
...to the facts of a particular case, it must still be shown that its violation was the proximate cause of plaintiff's injury (Swift v. City of New York, 270 N.Y. 162; Walther v. News Syndicate Co., 276 App. Div. 169; LaRue v. Tiernan, 260 App. Div. 337, affd. 285 N.Y. 550). It must be establi......
-
MacKinnon v. Hendrickson Bros. Inc.
...and (3) defendants were not put on notice to use greater care than the reasonable care which they actually exercised (Swift v. City of New York, 270 N.Y. 162, 200 N.E. 681; Johnson v. City of New York, 208 N.Y. 77, 101 N.E. 691; Hall v. New York Telephone Co., 214 N.Y. 49, 108 N.E. 182; Mey......
-
Prudential Ins. Co. of America v. Stone
...270 N.Y. 154200 N.E. 679PRUDENTIAL INS. CO. OF AMERICAv.STONE et al.Court of Appeals of New York.March 3, 1936 ... Action by the Prudential Insurance Company of America against Dorothy Stone ... 156]Merwin F. Le Vine, Solon Weit, and Howard S. Levie, all of New York City, for respondent.[270 N.Y. 157]FINCH, Judge.This is an action to rescind a contract of life ... ...