From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Koehne v. New York and Queens County Railway Company

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Nov 27, 1900
58 N.E. 1089 (N.Y. 1900)

Opinion

Submitted October 25, 1900

Decided November 27, 1900

William E. Stewart for appellant.

Byron P. Stratton and Elmer G. Story for respondent.


This appeal cannot be sustained upon the theory that the previously existing law as to the degree of care required of carriers to insure the safety of their passengers has been changed by the decision in Stierle v. U. Ry. Co. ( 156 N.Y. 70, 684), for no such change was made or intended, as is manifest from the opinion delivered upon the motion for a reargument, where this court plainly declared that the decision in that case was not intended to, and did not, effect any such change, and as there are no other errors which would justify a reversal the judgment should be affirmed, with costs.

PARKER, Ch. J., GRAY, BARTLETT, VANN and WERNER, JJ., concur; CULLEN, J., not sitting.

Judgment affirmed.


Summaries of

Koehne v. New York and Queens County Railway Company

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Nov 27, 1900
58 N.E. 1089 (N.Y. 1900)
Case details for

Koehne v. New York and Queens County Railway Company

Case Details

Full title:MINNIE KOEHNE, Respondent, v . NEW YORK AND QUEENS COUNTY RAILWAY COMPANY…

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Nov 27, 1900

Citations

58 N.E. 1089 (N.Y. 1900)
58 N.E. 1089

Citing Cases

O'Brien v. New York Railways Co.

It thus appears that if the testimony offered by the plaintiff was accepted as credible, a position of grave…

Conway v. Brooklyn Heights R.R. Co.

There is such an obligation upon the common carrier of passengers as stated in the clause quoted. (…