Swift v. City of New York

New York Court of Appeals
Swift v. City of New York, 200 N.E. 681 (N.Y. 1936)
270 N.Y. 162; 1936 N.Y. LEXIS 1526
<italic>Per Curiam.</italic>

Swift v. City of New York

Opinion of the Court

*165 Per Curiam.

There is no evidence that defendant was chargeable with notice of special danger to children from existing conditions. (Johnson v. City of New York, 208 N. Y. 77; McDonald v. Degnon-McLean Cont. Co., 124 App. Div. 824; affd., 205 N. Y. 502.) The ordinance was intended for the protection of persons traveling on the highway in the usual manner, and even, if applicable to the facts in this case, its violation is not shown to have been the proximate cause of plaintiff’s injury. No causal connection is shown.

The judgment of the Appellate Division and that of the Trial Term should be reversed and the complaint dismissed, with costs in all courts.

Crane, Ch. J., Lehman, O’Brien, Hubbs, Crouch, Loughran and Finch, JJ., concur. Judgments reversed, etc.

Reference

Full Case Name
Doris Swift, an Infant, by Sarah Swift, Her Guardian Ad Litem, Et Al., Respondents, v. the City of New York Et Al., Defendants, and Bronx Water Works Corporation, Appellant
Cited By
5 cases
Status
Published