midpage

Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad CompanyPalsgraf v. Long Island Railroad Company

New York Court of Appeals
Oct 9, 1928
Versions:249 N.Y. 511
164 N.E. 564
1928 N.Y. LEXIS 836
59 A.L.R. 1263
Per Curiam.

Motion for reargument.

If we assume that the plaintiff was nearer the scene of the explosion than the prevailing opinion would suggest, she was not so near that injury from a falling package, not known to contain explosives, would be within the range of reasonable prevision.

The motion should be denied, with ten dollars costs and necessary printing disbursements.

Cardozo, Ch. J., Pound, Lehman and Kellogg, JJ., concur; Crane, Andrews and O’Brien, JJ., concur in result.

Case Details

Case Name: Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad Company
Court Name: New York Court of Appeals
Date Published: Oct 9, 1928
Citations: 249 N.Y. 511; 164 N.E. 564; 1928 N.Y. LEXIS 836; 59 A.L.R. 1263
Court Abbreviation: N.Y.
Log In