TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Sipowicz v. Lehigh Valley Railroad Company

Theodore Sipowicz, an Infant, by Boleslaw Sipowicz, His Guardian Ad Litem, Respondent, v. Lehigh Valley Railroad Company, Appellant; Boleslaw Sipowicz, Respondent, v. Lehigh Valley Railroad Company, Appellant

Sipowicz v. Lehigh Valley R.R. Co., 132 N.E. 877 (N.Y. 1921)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
New York Court of Appeals · State Highest Courts
Decided
April 19, 1921
Citations
132 N.E. 877231 N.Y. 5341921 N.Y. LEXIS 687
Headnotes
Negligence — railroads—■negligent operation of train and -of gates protecting railroad crossing.
Summary
Appeal, in each of the above-entitled actions, from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the fourth judicial department, entered December 12, 1919, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict. The first action was to recover for personal injuries alleged to' have been sustained by plaintiff through the negligence of defendant. The second action was to recover for a father’s loss of services and medical expenses by reason of personal injuries received by his son through the alleged negligence of defendant. Theodore Sipowicz, a boy eight years of age, while riding in a buggy driven by his brother, aged twelve years, was severely injured, at the crossing of William street with the defendant’s railroad just outside of the city of Buffalo, by reason of the said buggy being struck by one of defendant’s trains. The complaints alleged that the defendant negligently, carelessly and recklessly caused one of its locomotives to be operated over the crossing at a high rate of speed and failed to give proper or sufficient warning or "notice of its approach and that the defendant was careless in the operation of the gates protecting the crossing.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court

Judgment in each case affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: Chase, Hogan, Cardozo,.Pound and Crane, JJ. Dissenting: His cock, Ch. J. and McLaughlin, J.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1928: 11948: 219282026peak 1948 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Baker v. Lehigh Valley R.R. Co.161 N.E. 445 (N.Y. 1928)
  2. Knight v. Baltimore & O. R.8 F.R.D. 256 (W.D.N.Y. 1948)
  3. Knight v. Baltimore & O. R.8 F.R.D. 261 (W.D.N.Y. 1948)

Most recent

  1. Knight v. Baltimore & O. R.8 F.R.D. 256 (W.D.N.Y. 1948)
  2. Knight v. Baltimore & O. R.8 F.R.D. 261 (W.D.N.Y. 1948)
  3. Baker v. Lehigh Valley R.R. Co.161 N.E. 445 (N.Y. 1928)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list