Opinion
June 13, 1950.
Present — Peck, P.J., Cohn, Callahan, Van Voorhis and Shientag, JJ.
The court's charge with respect to the rules of contributory negligence was improper and prejudicial to plaintiff. As it cannot be said that plaintiff was guilty of contributory negligence as a matter of law, the judgment is unanimously reversed, because of said error, and a new trial ordered, with costs to the appellant to abide the event.