Graham v. Manhattan Railway Co.
Graham v. Manhattan Railway Co.
28 N.Y.S. 739; 8 Misc. 305; 59 N.Y. St. Rep. 279
(New York Supplement)
Opinion of the Court
We think, on the other hand, it was the plain and manifest duty of the appellant, when he found how dangerous the condition of the platform was, and had reached a place of safety on the Fifty-Third street platform, to wait for the next train, and not put himself where the gates of the car platform could not be shut, or have voluntarily gone upon a platform which he knew was dangerous, and by so doing took the risk which resulted in the injuries received by him. The judgment should be affirmed, with costs. All concur.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.