TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Brothers v. Village of Ilion

Lillian Brothers, an Infant, by Her Guardian ad Litem, Margaret Brothers v. The Village of Ilion, and Conrad Klipple

Bros. v. Vill. of Ilion, 224 A.D. 688 (1928)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · State Appellate Courts
Decided
May 15, 1928
Citations
224 A.D. 688

Opinion of the Court

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Per Curiam.

Plaintiff suffered injuries by coming in contact with a barbed wire fence. The complaint alleged that the place where the fence was erected and where the accident took place was within the limits of a public street and that the accident occurred without negligence on plaintiff’s part but through the negligence or wrongful act of defendant Klipple in erecting the fence and through the negligence of the defendant village in failing to remove it after actual or constructive notice of its existence. The learned trial court instructed the jury that to find against the defendant Klipple they must find in addition to the freedom of plaintiff from contributory negligence that the place where the accident happened was a public street, and that the erection of the fence by defendant Klipple was negligent, and to render a verdict against the defendant village they must also find that the fence was there for such time before the accident that the village authorities, in the exercise of care, would have been aware of its existence and had a reasonable opportunity to remove it. The evidence was sufficient to sustain findings favorable to the plaintiff on all these matters. The verdict, however, exonerated the defendant Klipple but condemned the defendant village. No negligence on the part of the village was possible unless there was negligence or wrongful act on the part of Klipple in erecting the fence. The verdict was, therefore, illogical, and its inconsistency necessitates a reversal of the judgment entered on the verdict, and a new trial. The judgment and order should be reversed, with costs as to the appellant village against the plaintiff to abide the event, and with costs to the plaintiff against the defendant Klipple to abide the event. All concur. Present — Hubbs, P. J., Sears, Crouch, Taylor and Sawyer, JJ. On first appeal: Judgment and order reversed on the facts and a new trial granted, with costs to appellant to abide event. On second appeal: judgment reversed on the facts and a new trial granted, with costs to appellant to abide event.

How later courts describe this case

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

1932: 11948: 11991: 119322026peak 1932 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Mahoney v. International Railway Co.234 A.D. 290 (1932)
  2. Bernstein v. Olian77 F. Supp. 672 (S.D.N.Y. 1948)
  3. Gentile v. County of Suffolk926 F.2d 142 (2d Cir. 1991)

Most recent

  1. Gentile v. County of Suffolk926 F.2d 142 (2d Cir. 1991)
  2. Bernstein v. Olian77 F. Supp. 672 (S.D.N.Y. 1948)
  3. Mahoney v. International Railway Co.234 A.D. 290 (1932)

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