Case ID: ad_153/html/0935-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Foote, J. (dissenting):", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Julia McDermott, Appellant, v. The City of Buffalo, Respondent.
    Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, entered in the Brie county clerk’s office on the 13th day of April, 1909, and also from an order entered on the 3d day of May, 1909, denying a motion for a new trial.
    Judgment and order reversed and new trial granted, with costs to appellant to abide event. Held, that the trial court erred in holding that the plaintiff was guilty of contributory negligence as matter of law; that the evidence was sufficient to present a question of fact in that regard as well as upon the question of defendant’s negligence. All concurred, except Foote, J., who dissented in a memorandum.
   Foote, J. (dissenting):

There was not sufficient evidence of defendant’s negligence to" entitle plaintiff to have that question left to the jury. The weather conditions prior to the day of the accident were not shown. The uneven condition of the icy surface of the walk was not shown to have been due to neglect. It may have been common to all or many of the walks in the city at that time because of weather conditions, and in spite of due diligence to keep them clean. (Rogers v. City of Rome, 96 App. Div. 427; Hatch v. City of Emira, 142 id. 174; Harrington v. City of Buffalo, 121 N. Y.