From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rudman v. New York City Transit Authority

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Jul 2, 1968
22 N.Y.2d 863 (N.Y. 1968)

Opinion

Argued February 26, 1968

Decided July 2, 1968

Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department, THOMAS DICKENS, J.

Aaron J. Broder and Moe Levine for appellant.

Edward W. Summers, Sidney Brandes and Helen R. Cassidy for respondent.


Order reversed and a new trial granted, with costs to abide the event, in the following memorandum: Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to appellant, we find an issue of fact as to defendant's actual knowledge of plaintiff's peril presented by the testimony of plaintiff's wife that she saw him lying on the tracks with the train approaching two city blocks away, coupled with the motorman's testimony that he observed plaintiff while he was still on the platform. Accordingly, the complaint should not have been dismissed. The order of the Appellate Division should be reversed, with costs to abide the event, and the matter should be remanded to the trial court for a new trial.

Concur: Judges BERGAN, KEATING, BREITEL and JASEN. Chief Judge FULD and Judges BURKE and SCILEPPI dissent and vote to affirm on the opinion at the Appellate Division.


Summaries of

Rudman v. New York City Transit Authority

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Jul 2, 1968
22 N.Y.2d 863 (N.Y. 1968)
Case details for

Rudman v. New York City Transit Authority

Case Details

Full title:GEORGE RUDMAN, Appellant, v. NEW YORK CITY TRANSIT AUTHORITY, Respondent

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Jul 2, 1968

Citations

22 N.Y.2d 863 (N.Y. 1968)
293 N.Y.S.2d 122
239 N.E.2d 746

Citing Cases

Rodak v. Fury

At bar, the appendix is insufficient to determine as a matter of law whether the decedent was contributorily…

People v. Williams

The court providently exercised its discretion when it granted a downward departure to level two only, and we…