Case ID: ny_213/html/0694-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Per Curiam.\n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

William W. Bullock, Jr., an Infant, by William W. Bullock, His Guardian ad Litem, Appellant, v. New York Central and Hudson River Railroad Company, Respondent.
    (Argued December 7, 1914;
    decided January 12, 1915.)
    
      Bullock v. N. Y. C. & H. R. R. R. Co., 167 App. Div. 332, affirmed.
    Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered June 23,1913, upon an order reversing a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict and directing a dismissal of the complaint.
    
      Thomas J. O’Neill for 'appellant.
    
      John F. Brennan for respondent.
   Per Curiam.

We are of the opinion that the defendant owed the plaintiff the duty of reasonable care in the maintenance of its station platform and the approaches thereto, but we are also of the opinion that the evidence is insufficient to show that the defendant violated that duty, or that the plaintiff, himself, was free from contributory negligence. The case being one in which the trial court should have granted the defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint, the Appellate Division acted within its power in making the disposition of the case which the trial court should have made. (Middleton v. Whitridge, 213 N. Y. 499, decided herewith.)

The judgment should be affirmed, with costs.

Willard Bartlett, Ch. J., Hiscook, Chase, Hogan, Miller and Cardozo, JJ., concur.

Judgment affirmed.