Nathan Schachter, Respondent, v. Interborough Rapid Transit Company, Appellant

Nathan Schachter, Respondent, v. Interborough Rapid Transit Company, Appellant. First Department, July 7, 1911. See head note inJSehaohter.v. Interborough Rapid Transit Co. (ante, p. 139). Appeal by the defendant, the Interborough Rapid Transit Company, from an order of the Appellate Term of the Supreme ■ Court, entered in the office of the clerk of the county of New York on the 7th day of February, 1911, affirming a judgment of the City Court of the city of New York in favor of the plaintiff, entered in the office of the clerk of said court on the 28th day of June, 1910, upon the verdict of a jury for $150, and also affirming an order of said City Court entered on the 22d day of August, 1910, denying the defendant’s motion for a new trial made upon the minutes. Bayard H. Ames [John Montgomery and Walter Henry Wood with him on the brief], for the appellant. Moses Feltenstein, for the respondent. [MAJORITY — Per Curiam:] Per Curiam: This action is brought by the father of Pauline Schachter to recover damages alleged to have been sustained in consequence of the personal injuries received by her, she being an infant. The facts, excepting with respect to the question of damages, are the same in this case as those presented by the appeal in the case of Pauline Schachter against the same appellant (146 App. ( Div. 139), argued' and decided herewith; and on the authority of the opinion in that case the determination of the Appellate Term is reversed, and the judgment and order of the City Court are reversed and a new trial granted, with costs to appellant in this court and in the Appellate Term to abide the event. Present — Ingraham, P. J., McLaughlin, Laughlin, Miller and Dowling, JJ. Determination, judgment and order reversed, with costs in in this court and in Appellate Term to abide event.