Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
Torts · MBE-tested
Malachi Farrell, Appellant, v. City of Middletown, Respondent
172 N.Y. 666·New York Court of Appeals·1902·NY
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
Malachi Farrell, Appellant, v. City of Middletown, Respondent.
Farrell v. City of Middletown, 56 App. Div. 535, reversed.
(Argued November 25, 1902;
decided December 9, 1902.)
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered April 16, 1901, affirming a judgment in favor of defendant entered upon a dismissal of the complaint by the court at a Trial Term and an order denying a motion for a new trial.
William Vcmamee and Thomas Watts for appellant.
W. T. Shaw and W F. O'Weill for respondent.
[MAJORITY — Per Owriam.]
Per Owriam.
We are of the opinion that the evidence presented a question of fact as to the negligence of the defendant, which the court should have submitted to the jury, and that it erred in nonsuiting the plaintiff upon that ground.
The judgment should be reversed and a new trial granted, with costs to abide the event.
Parker, Ch. J., Gray, O’Brien, Martin, Vann, Cullen and Werner, JJ., concur.
Judgment reversed, etc.