Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad Co.

Helen Palsgraf, Respondent, v. The Long Island Railroad Company, Appellant

Court of Appeals of New York

248 N.Y. 339; 162 N.E. 99; 59 A.L.R. 1253

February 24, 1928, Argued -- May 29, 1928, Decided

A man carrying a package jumped aboard a car of a moving train and, seeming unsteady as if about to fall, a guard on the car reached forward to help him in and another guard on the platform pushed him from behind, during which the package was dislodged and falling upon the rails exploded, causing injuries to plaintiff, an intending passenger, who stood on the platform many feet away. There was nothing in the appearance of the package to give notice that it contained explosives. In an action by the intending passenger against the railroad company to recover for such injuries, the complaint should be dismissed. Negligence is not actionable unless it involves the invasion of a legally protected interest, the violation of a right, and the conduct of the defendant's guards, if a wrong in relation to the holder of the package, was not a wrong in its relation to the plaintiff standing many feet away.

William McNamara and Joseph F. Keany for appellant. Plaintiff failed to establish that her injuries were caused by negligence of the defendant and it was error for the court to deny the defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint. ( Paul v. Cons. Fireworks Co., 212 N.Y. 117; Hall v. N. Y. Tel. Co., 214 N.Y. 49; Perry v. Rochester Lime Co., 219 N.Y. 60; Pyne v. Cazenozia Canning Co., 220 N.Y. 126; Adams v. Bullock, 227 N.Y. 208; McKinney v. N. Y. Cons. R. R. Co., 230 N.Y. 194; Palsey v. Waldorf Astoria, Inc., 220 App. Div. 613; Parrott v. Wells Fargo & Co., 15 Wall. 524; A., T. & S. Fe Ry. Co. v. Calhoun, 213 U.S. 1; Prudential Society, Inc., v. Ray, 207 App. Div. 496; 239 N.Y. 600.)

Matthew W. Wood for respondent. The judgment of affirmance was amply sustained by the law and the facts. ( Saugerties Bank v. Delaware & Hudson Co., 236 N.Y. 425; Milwaukee & St. Paul Ry. Co. v. Kellogg, 94 U.S. 469; Lowery v. Western Union Tel. Co., 60 N.Y. 198; Insurance Co. v. Tweed, 7 Wall. 44; Trapp v. McClellan, 68 App. Div. 362; Ring v. City of Cohoes, 77 N. Y. 83; McKenzie v. Waddell Coal Co., 89 App. Div. 415; Slater v. Barnes, 241 N.Y. 284; King v. Interborough R. T. Co., 233 N.Y. 330.)

Cardozo, Ch. J. Pound, Lehman and Kellogg, JJ., concur with Cardozo, Ch. J.; Andrews, J., dissents in opinion in which Crane and O'Brien, JJ., concur.