From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Curtiss v. Lehigh Valley Railroad Company

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Mar 21, 1922
135 N.E. 915 (N.Y. 1922)

Summary

In Curtiss v. Lehigh Valley R.R. Co. (233 N.Y. 554) the Court of Appeals reversed the Appellate Division upon the strength of the dissenting opinion of Mr. Justice KELLOGG (194 A.D. 931). Upon reading the dissenting opinion one finds that Judge KELLOGG specifically comments "She did not see any soap or soapsuds."

Summary of this case from Gondolfi v. Palisade Holding Co., Inc.

Opinion

Argued March 7, 1922

Decided March 21, 1922

Philip E. Lonergan for appellant.

Leon C. Rhodes for respondent.


Judgment reversed and complaint dismissed, with costs in all courts, on the dissenting opinion of HENRY T. KELLOGG, J., below.

Concur: HISCOCK, Ch. J., HOGAN, CARDOZO, POUND, McLAUGHLIN, CRANE and ANDREWS, JJ.


Summaries of

Curtiss v. Lehigh Valley Railroad Company

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Mar 21, 1922
135 N.E. 915 (N.Y. 1922)

In Curtiss v. Lehigh Valley R.R. Co. (233 N.Y. 554) the Court of Appeals reversed the Appellate Division upon the strength of the dissenting opinion of Mr. Justice KELLOGG (194 A.D. 931). Upon reading the dissenting opinion one finds that Judge KELLOGG specifically comments "She did not see any soap or soapsuds."

Summary of this case from Gondolfi v. Palisade Holding Co., Inc.
Case details for

Curtiss v. Lehigh Valley Railroad Company

Case Details

Full title:CLARA A. CURTISS, Respondent, v . LEHIGH VALLEY RAILROAD COMPANY, Appellant

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Mar 21, 1922

Citations

135 N.E. 915 (N.Y. 1922)
135 N.E. 915

Citing Cases

Walz v. Paul Helfer, Inc.

In reversing judgments in favor of the plaintiffs and dismissing the complaint, Judge FINCH, writing for the…

Nunally v. State of New York

The court is persuaded that Green, the regular guard, was then on vacation and that the substitute guard, who…