Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 1910

Resnick v. Bookhop

Resnick v. Bookhop
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · Decided March 10, 1910
121 N.Y.S. 594 (New York Supplement)

Counsel

Morris Meyers (Henry Swartz, of counsel),,for appellant., James <33. Henney (E. Clyde Sherwood, of counsel), for respondent.

Resnick v. Bookhop

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

Taking the view most favorable to the plaintiff on the evidence, it is sufficient to go to the jury upon the question whether the defendant performed his full duty of giving the plaintiff proper instruction as to the danger of the machine which he was operating. Pelow v. Oil Well Supply Co., 194 N. Y. 64, 69, 86 N. E. 812. If defendant did not do so, he was guilty of negligence, and the jury could have found that the plaintiff was not guilty of contributory negligence.

The judgment should be reversed, and a new trial ordered, with costs to the appellant to abide the event.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.