Hyperlawhypertext legal database Hensle v. Edison Electric Illuminating Co. 155 N.Y.S. 1112

← Cases

Hensle v. Edison Electric Illuminating Co.

155 N.Y.S. 1112 Court N.Y. App. Div. Decision date 1915-12-03 English

Contents

Majority

p. 1112
HENSLE, Respondent, v. EDISON ELECTRIC ILLUMINATING CO. OF BROOKLYN, Appellant.
(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.
December 3, 1915.)

Headnote

Appeal from Trial Term, New York County. Action by Barbara .Hensle, as administratrix, against the Edison Electric Illuminating Company of Brooklyn. From a judgment for plaintim, and denial of new trial, defendant appeals. Reversed and remanded.
Edward W. Hatch~ of New York City, for appellant.
Joseph Fennelly, of New York City, for respondent.

We think, upon the evidence, that the finding that the deceased wa~ free from contributory negligence is not sirs-tamed. The judgment and order appealed frouL are therefore reversed, the finding that the deceased was not guilty of contributory negligence is reversed, and a new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide the event. Order-filed.

INGRAEAM, P. J., and CLARKE, J., dissent, and vote for affirmance.