# Viscardo v. Galloway

> Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · July 15, 1929 · 227 A.D. 672

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/5308469

## Case

- **Full name:** Biaggio Viscardo, Individually and as Guardian ad Litem of Aniello Viscardo, an Infant v. Harvey Galloway and John Thorton
- **Court:** Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
- **Decided:** July 15, 1929
- **Citations:** 227 A.D. 672
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion of the court
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/5308469

## Opinion text

Judgment reversed upon the law, and a new trial granted, costs to abide the event. In our opinion, the granting of a nonsuit was erroneous. The case of Martin v. Herzog ( 228 N. Y. 164 ) is distinguishable from the case at bar. The only question determined in that ease was that.a charge that the absence of light upon a vehicle was only some evidence of negligence and a refusal to charge that such absence of lights was “ prima facie evidence of negligence ” was error. The Court of Appeals did not determine that the absence of lights, in violation of the statute, was under all circumstances negligence as a matter of law. The question as to whether the absence of light on plaintiff’s bicycle was a proximate cause of the injury, in view of the circumstances disclosed by the evidence, was a question for the jury. Lazansky, P. J., Young, Hagarty, Seeger and Cars-well, JJ., concur.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/5308469. Public record. Not legal advice.