Hyperlawhypertext legal database Brodsky v. Metropolitan Street Railway Co. 72 N.Y.S. 1095

← Cases

Brodsky v. Metropolitan Street Railway Co.

72 N.Y.S. 1095 Court N.Y. App. Term English

Contents

Majority

p. 1095
BRODSKY, Respondent, v. METROPOLITAN ST. RY. CO., Appellant.
(Supreme Court, Appellate Term.
June, 1901.)

Headnote

Action by
p. 1096
Morris Brodsky against the Metropolitan Street Railway Company.
H. A. Robinson (G. Glenn 'Worden, of counsel), for appellant. Isidor Cohn, for respondent.

Although the evidence 'might well lead to a different conclusion from' rthat reached by the learned justice in the court below, it was", nevertheless, conflicting, and ■there is not a preponderance in defendant’s favor ■sufficiently strong to warrant this court in disturbing the verdict. Judgment affirmed, with ■costs.