Lapieduse v. Syracuse Rapid Transit Railway Co.

Majority

p. 561

Lillie Lapieduse, an Infant, by Abraham Lapieduse, Her Guardian ad Litem, Respondent, v. Syracuse Rapid Transit Railway Company, Appellant.

Headnote

Lapieduse v. Syracuse R. Tr. Ry. Co., 112 App. Div. 904 , affirmed.

(Argued January 21, 1907;

decided February 19, 1907.)

Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the fourth judicial department, entered March 30, 1906, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict and an order denying a motion for a new trial in an action to recover for personal injuries alleged to have been received through defendánt’s negligence.

p. 562

C. E. Spencer for appellant.

Theodore E. Hancock for respondent.

Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: Cullen, Ch. J.; Edward T. Bartlett, Haight, Hiscock and Chase, JJ., concur on the ground that the alleged errors were so cured by the subsequent charge as to become harmless; Gray and Willard Bartlett, JJ., dissent upon the ground that it was error to leave the case with the jury upon the. instruction that there was a legal presumption that the plaintiff was not mi juris.