The Fairmont West Virginian. (Fairmont, W. Va.) 1904-1914, 1905-08-23
COURT PUTS ONUS
ON CHAUFFEURS
APPELLATE DIVISION RULES
THEY MUST SLOW DOWN AT
STREET CORNERS.

NEW YORK. Aug. 23.-what is
considered by automobiles far
reaching decision and one which will
have great effect on their rights in
the streets OF this city was handed
down yesterday by the Appellate Di.
vision Of the Supreme Court. The
decision puts up to the chauffeurs
the responsibility of an accident in
which person may be injured while
an automobile is turning corner.
The lower courts recently took a
different view OF the matter and threw
out suits brought by persons injured
under such circumstances.
While in the particular case in
which the decision Of an automobile
is held accountable, drivers of other
classes of vehicles are thought to
come under the same ruling, which
takes from the defendent in suits
brought for damages the right to
plead that the person injured showed
carelessness in crossing corner
when the accident occurred.
In rendering It's decision the APP
pellate Division of the Supreme Court
says. in part:--"A person, whether
adult or infant, has the right to as.
sumo that the operator of an automo.
bile will exercise care and respect
the rights Of pedestrians in turning
the corners Of streets. Due care is
required under such circumstances
that the vehicle should be slowed
down and operated with care" In
so ruling the court sets aside the de.
cision of lower court that person
who allows his children to run unat.
tended about the street is responsi.
BILE should the children meet with in.
jury from vehicle turning corner.
Gerd Buscher, a milk dealer, of
No. SIG Tenth avenue, whose home
is at No. $50 West Forty.fourth
street, brought the original action
which resulted in yesterdays deci.
sion. His son, an eight.year-oldb boy,
was playing in front of his fathers
place of business, at the corner OF
Fortleth street and Tenth avenue,
when a vehicle of the New York
Transportation Company turning the
corner ran over the child and killed
him. Mr. Bascher sued for damages.
With the testimony all in, the
Judge sitting in the case refused to
allow the Jury to decide on verdict.
ruling himself that in allowing the
child to play unattended In the street
Mr.. Buscher had been guilty of con.
tributory negligence and therefore
had no cause for action. He main.
tanned that the roads were for We.
hicnlar traffic, and that any person in
them was himself accountable for
whatever injury he received.
Mr.. Buscher appealed the case, and
the Appellate Division has now decid.
ed that the Judge had no legal right
to pass on the merits of the case as
he did. but should have allowed the
question on which he ruled to have
been settled by the jury A new trial
OF the case Is ordered.
The decision is important, in tina,
more than a hundred similar cases
are now awaiting trial, hearings on
which have been put off from time to
time because of the decision rem.
dered by the lower court in the Bus.
cher case. Hundreds OF persons are
annually injured in this city by We
hicles turning corners at high rates
OF speed. and had the decision Of the
upper court been against Mr.. Buscher
it would have relieved the offenders
from liability to suit With the de-
cision as 1t is, however, the lives of
pedestrians in New York are made
more safe.