Torts · MBE-tested
Mary C. Crowley, an Infant, by James Crowley, Her Guardian ad Litem, Appellant, v. Rochester Swiss Laundry Company, Respondent
225 A.D. 730·New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division·1928·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
Mary C. Crowley, an Infant, by James Crowley, Her Guardian ad Litem, Appellant, v. Rochester Swiss Laundry Company, Respondent.
Affd., 251 N. Y.-.
[MAJORITY]
Judgment and order reversed on the law and a new trial granted, with costs to the appellant to abide the event, upon the ground that negligence, freedom from contributory negligence and damages were questions of fact for the jury. All concur, except Edgcomb, J., who dissents and votes for affirmance on the ground that the plaintiff was guilty of contributory negligence as a matter of law. Present — Clark, Sears, Crouch, Taylor and Edgcomb, JJ.