History
  • No items yet
midpage
Antonio v. Long Island Railroad Company, Inc.
49 N.E.2d 1002
NY
1943
Check Treatment

Lead Opinion

Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: Lehman, Ch. J., Loughran, Finch, Rippey, Conway and Desmond, JJ. Lewis, J., dissents in the following opimon.






Dissenting Opinion

Lewis, J.

(dissenting). The respondent has recovered damages for injuries sustained when he was struck by a train on the appellant’s right-of-way at a point of danger removed from any thoroughfare. The record, as I view it, discloses no evidence from which the jury cpuld find that at the time and place of his injuries the respondent was either a licensee or a business invitee of the appellant. On the contrary, the respondent was in a legal sense a stranger to the appellant. Being then and there engaged in his own pursuits, he was a trespasser at common law and by statute (Railroad Law, § 83; Penal Law, § 1990). In those circumstances the appellant owed no duty to the respondent except to refrain from inflicting intentional or wanton injury. (Keller v. Erie R. R. Co., 183 N. Y. 67, 71, 72; Gleason v. Central New England Ry. Co., 261 N. Y. 333, 335-337.) Accordingly, I dissent.

Case Details

Case Name: Antonio v. Long Island Railroad Company, Inc.
Court Name: New York Court of Appeals
Date Published: Apr 15, 1943
Citation: 49 N.E.2d 1002
Court Abbreviation: NY
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.