Case Name: PETERSON v. NEW YORK CITY RY. CO.
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Term
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1905-05-23
Citations: 94 N.Y.S. 22
Docket Number: 
Parties: PETERSON v. NEW YORK CITY RY. CO.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's New York Supplement
Volume: 94
Pages: 22–23

Head Matter:
PETERSON v. NEW YORK CITY RY. CO.
(Supreme Court, Appellate Term.
May 23, 1905.)
Street Railroads—Injury to Pedestrian.
Though a pedestrian heard the hell of a street car and did not get off the track, the operatives had no right to run into him.
[Ed. Note.—For cases in point, see vol. 44, Cent. Dig. Street Railroads, § 219.]
Appeal from Municipal Court, Borough of Manhattan, Ninth District.
Action by Henry Peterson against the New York City Railway Company. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals.
Affirmed.
Argued before SCOTT, P. J„ and TRUAX and DOWEING, JJ.
William E. Weaver and Charles H. Hill, for appellant.
Potter & Minor (George E. Minor, of counsel), for respondent.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Our attention has been called to but one exception to the evidence, and that was to the question asked one of the witnesses—if he was in a position to hear if any bell had been rung or gong sounded. We are of the opinion that this exception was not well taken. Under the circumstances of the case, the answer did not injure the appellant. Whether plaintiff heard or did not hear the bell was immaterial. Even if he had heard the bell, and did not get off the track, the defendant had no right to run into plaintiff and inflict the injuries that were inflicted. Cohn v. Met. St. Ry. Co., 34 Misc. Rep. 186, 68 N. Y. Supp. 830; Fishback v. Steinway Ry. Co., 11 App. Div. 152, 42 N. Y. Supp. 888.
We are also of the opinion that the judgment was not excessive. The judgment appealed from is affirmed, with costs.