Case Name: Effie M. Ainsworth, as Administratrix, etc., of William I. Ainsworth, Late of the City and County of Albany, New York, Deceased, Appellant, v. The New York Central and Hudson River Railroad Company, Respondent
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1912-05-08
Citations: 151 A.D. 332
Docket Number: 
Parties: Effie M. Ainsworth, as Administratrix, etc., of William I. Ainsworth, Late of the City and County of Albany, New York, Deceased, Appellant, v. The New York Central and Hudson River Railroad Company, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 151
Pages: 332–336

Head Matter:
Effie M. Ainsworth, as Administratrix, etc., of William I. Ainsworth, Late of the City and County of Albany, New York, Deceased, Appellant, v. The New York Central and Hudson River Railroad Company, Respondent.
Third Department,
May 8, 1912.
Negligence — death of conductor in yards — evidence — erroneous dismissal of complaint.
Evidence in an action against a railroad company to recover damages for-the death of a conductor and pin puller, alleged to have resulted from the defendant’s negligence, examined, and held, that a judgment dismissing the complaint should he reversed and a new trial granted.
Lyon, J., and Smith, P. J., dissented, with opinion.
Appeal by the plaintiff, Effie M. Ainsworth, as administratrix, etc., from a judgment of the Supreme Court in favor of the défendant, entered in the office of the clerk of the county of Albany on the 9th day of Hay, 1911, upon the dismissal of the complaint at the close of plaintiff’s case by direction of the court on a trial at the Albany Trial Term, and also from an order entered in said clerk’s office -on the same day, directing the dismissal of the complaint.
Richard O. Bassett, for the appellant.
William L. Visscher, for the respondent.

Opinion:
Per Curiam:
From the evidence the jury might have found that the speed limit in the yard was six miles per hour, and that the car causing the intestate's death was proceeding at an excessive speed, that the switch stand was not lighted and that there were knuckles and other obstructions in the six foot. It' is not necessary for the plaintiff to prove whether the-intestate tripped over a part of the switch stand, the rod or obstructions in the six foot. It is enough, if it appears that there were obstructions, and that by reason of the excessive speed, the failure to light the switch stand, and the other conditions existing,, the intestate's death was caused by the negligence of the defendant. The judgment should, therefore, be reversed and a new trial granted, with costs to appellant to abide the event.
All concurred, except Lyon, J., dissenting, in opinion, in which Smith, P. J., concurred.