Case ID: nys_107/html/0561-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

LEHMAN v. NEW YORK CITY RY. CO.
    (Supreme Court, Appellate Term.
    December 12, 1907.)
    Street Railways—Injury to Vehicle—Negligence—Question fob Juby.
    Evidence as to the striking of an automobile by a street car helé sufficient to take the question of the company’s negligence to the jury.
    [Ed. Note.—Eor cases in point, see Cent. Dig. vol. 44, Street Railroads, §§ 251-257.]
    Appeal from Municipal Court, Borough of Manhattan,- Fourteenth District.
    Action by Allan Lehman against the New York City Railway Company. From a judgment for defendant, plaintiff appeals. Reversed, and new trial ordered.
    Argued before GILDERSLEEVE, P. J., and GUY and BRUCE, JJ.
    Hollander & Bernheimer, for appellant.
    William E. Weaver, for respondent.
   PER CURIAM.

Action for damage to plaintiff’s automobile through defendant’s negligence. The plaintiff was proceeding south on Madison avenue and crossed 125th street to the south side, where he turned on the south-bound track, and ran along for a short distance in order to avoid a truck standing in the street. Just as he was leaving the south-bound track, and turning again off the track to the pavement, he was struck in the rear by the car of the defendant, which had been standing still on the north side of 125th street. The complaint was dismissed. Under the decision of Bang v. N. Y. Q. C. Ry. Co., 113 App. Div. 673, 99 N. Y. Supp. 946, and Central Brewing Co., 49 Misc. Rep. 523, 97 N. Y. Supp. 1025, it was error to dismiss the complaint. The defendant should have been put on its defense.

Judgment reversed, and new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide the event.