From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

FAIRHURST v. TAG

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 1, 1920
192 App. Div. 917 (N.Y. App. Div. 1920)

Opinion

May, 1920.


The testimony from defendant's chauffeur, called on the retrial, supplies an explanation for plaintiff's failure to have seen defendant's automobile. At the time she looked in crossing Jefferson avenue a south-bound trolley car on Nostrand avenue had shut off the automobile from her sight. The question of defendant's negligence and plaintiff's alleged failure of care were left to the jury, in a charge free from exception. The judgment and order are, therefore, affirmed, with costs. Jenks, P.J., Mills, Rich and Putnam, JJ., concur; Blackmar, J., concurs in the result.


Summaries of

FAIRHURST v. TAG

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 1, 1920
192 App. Div. 917 (N.Y. App. Div. 1920)
Case details for

FAIRHURST v. TAG

Case Details

Full title:SARAH FAIRHURST, Respondent, v. HANNAH M. TAG, Appellant

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: May 1, 1920

Citations

192 App. Div. 917 (N.Y. App. Div. 1920)