Opinion
Submitted October 1, 1928
Decided October 9, 1928
Motion for reargument.
If we assume that the plaintiff was nearer the scene of the explosion than the prevailing opinion would suggest, she was not so near that injury from a falling package, not known to contain explosives, would be within the range of reasonable prevision.
The motion should be denied, with ten dollars costs and necessary printing disbursements.
CARDOZO, Ch. J., POUND, LEHMAN and KELLOGG, JJ., concur; CRANE, ANDREWS and O'BRIEN, JJ., concur in result.