A taxi driver working for the Defendant, Peerless Transportation Co. (Defendant), jumped from his taxi while it was running to escape an armed highwayman who was being pursued by his victim. Negligence not proven because it was an emergency and he had to save his own life. FACTS: An armed … The plaintiff, an eleven-year-old girl, lost the use of her thumb as a result of a snowmobile accident. CORDAS V. PEERLESS TRANSPORTATION CO. City Ct. of N.Y., 27 N.Y.S.2d 198 (1941) NATURE OF THE CASE: This was an action to recover damages for negligence. Written and curated by real attorneys at Quimbee. City Court of New York, New York County April 3, 1941. Poddar saw a psychologist from U of CA and he confessed that he intended to kill P. P was involuntarily committed for a short time, but was released. The taxi company was not held liable for its driver’s actions. Cordas v. Peerless Transportation Co. (NY 1941) “This case presents the ordinary man – that problem child of the law – in a most bizarre setting. The conduct of an individual in an emergency situation cannot be measured by the same standard of care as a reasonable person in a non-emergency situation. Trimarco v. Klein56 N.Y.2d 98, 436 N.E.2d 502, 451 N.Y.S.2d 52, 1982 N.Y. Roberts v. State of Louisiana; ... How to Brief a Case What to Expect in Class How to Outline How to Prepare for Exams 1L Course Overviews Synopsis of Rule of Law. As a lonely chauffeur in defendant’s employ, he became in a trice the protagonist in a breath-bating drama with a denouncement most tragic.” Cordas v. Peerless Transp. He jumped in the back of D's cab, put a gun to his head, and told him to drive. Cordas v. Peerless Transportation Co. An act by a reasonable person that is considered negligent when done under normal circumstances is not per se negligent if performed by a reasonable person during an emergency in which he is suddenly faced with certain danger. AudioCaseFiles; Video. Poddar saw a psychologist from U of CA and he confessed that he intended to kill P. P was involuntarily committed for a short time, but was released. Cordas v. Peerless Transportation Co27 N.Y. S 2d 198 (1941). ... Tarasof v. The Regents of the University of California ... Facts: P was a student at U of CA. City Court of New York, New York County April 3, 1941. CASE BRIEF. 27 N.Y.S.2d 198 . ; The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents. Co., 27 N.Y.S.2d 198, 1941 N.Y. Misc. P sued D in negligence. 1 TERRY v. OHIO No. D slammed on his brakes suddenly and jumped out of the car. All rights reserved. The plaintiff, an eleven-year-old girl, lost the use of her thumb as a result of a snowmobile accident. Cordas v. Peerless Transportation Co. case brief summary F: Motion for reserved decision, D dismissing P complaint granted. Negligence is defined as the failure to exercise that care and caution which a reasonable and prudent person ordinarily would exercise under like conditions or circumstances. Brief Fact Summary. Home » Case Briefs Bank » Torts » Cordas v. Peerless Transportation Co. Case Brief. RP Blind P [blind, no cane] Robinson v Lindsay. Roberts v. State of Louisiana COA LA - 1981 Facts: Burson was a blind man who operated a concession stand in a post office in Louisiana. He jumped in the back of D's cab, put a gun to his head, and told him to drive. Cases; Witnesses; Industries; Practices On his way there, Burson collided with P (a 75-year-old man) and broke P's hip. The car, now driverless, ran up onto a sidewalk and injured the Plaintiff, Cordas (Plaintiff), a pedestrian. The hay eventually did ignite and burn … One of the pursued jumped into a cab. It's different if the D created the dangerous situation. Cordas v. Peerless Transportation Co. City Court of New York, New York County, 1941. Torts Case Brief Standard of Care Cordas v. Peerless Transportation Co. City Ct of New York, New York County, 1941. Synopsis of Rule of Law. The blasting case, was there negligence, answer is no, they did everything to prevent the blast from causing damage (use this case carefully when citing for authority) ... Cordas v. Peerless Transportation Co. Access This Case Brief for Free With a 7-Day Free Trial Membership. Defendant was warned that there was a substantial possibility that the hay would ignite, and Defendant replied that he would “chance it”. Negligence: The Standard of Care Cordas v. Peerless Transportation Co. After driving for a short distance, the driver slammed on the brakes and jumped out of the car. Prosser, pp. Man with gun to his head jumped out of car. CO. et al. ... Have you written case briefs that you want to share with our community? As a result of the driver’s actions, Cordas (plaintiff) and her two infant children were injured by the taxi cab. Christian Ballow Section 4 Cordas v. Peerless Transportation Co. City Court of New York, New York County 27 N.Y.S.2d 198; 1941 N.Y. Misc. Cordas v. Peerless Transportation Co. NYC City Court - 1941 Facts:  Some hoodlum robbed someone and ran away. Trial court dismissed the complaint. Every Bundle includes the complete text from each of the titles below: PLUS: Hundreds of law school topic-related videos from The Understanding Law Video Lecture Series™: Monthly Subscription ($19 / Month) Annual Subscription ($175 / Year). The trial judge ruled that defendant’s employee (the taxi driver) acted reasonably under the emergency and dismissed the complaint. D did not … Facts: A cab driver, an employee of Peerless Transportation (D), was ordered to drive at the point of an assailant's gun. CASE BRIEF WORKSHEET Title of Case : Cordas v. Peerless Transportation Co., City Ct. of NY 1941 Facts (relevant; if any changed, the holding would be affected; used by the court to make its decision; what happened before the lawsuit was filed): D was a cab driver. A unanimous Strange Judicial Opinions Hall of Fame opinion is Cordas v. Peerless Transportation Co., penned in 1941 by Judge Carlin (no relation to George) of the New York City Court. Access This Case Brief for Free With a 7-Day Free Trial Membership. breunig v. american family insurance co. woman who was insane and caused an accident after a "delusion" found liable; insane are to be held to a reasonable person standard cordas v. peerless transportation co. LEXIS 1709 Facts: The chauffer driving a cab owned by Peerless Transportation abandoned his vehicle while in motion after he was threatened by his passenger, a thief, with a pistol, who was fleeing the scene of a crime. Professor Epstein 535 Madison Ave. Gourmet Foods, Inc. v. Finlandia Ctr. Robinson v. Lindsay Supreme Court of WA - 1979 Facts: P was an 11-year-old girl riding on the back of a snowmobile operated by 13-year-old boy D. In an accident, P's thumb was cut off on the snowmobile. The trial judge ruled that defendant’s employee (the taxi driver) acted reasonably under the emergency and dismissed the complaint. Risk Utility Balancing . Name. Torts Case Brief Standard of Care Cordas v. Peerless Transportation Co. City Ct of New York, New York County, 1941. The defendant was a chauffeur and the victim of an armed car-jacking by a fleeing robber who threatened to blow the chauffeur’s brains out. ; The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents. Cordas v Peerless Transportation. Issue. Get Hodges v. Carter, 80 S.E.2d 144 (N.C. 1954), Supreme Court of North Carolina, case facts, key issues, and holdings and reasonings online today. Roberts v. State of Louisiana COA LA - 1981 Facts: Burson was a blind man who operated a concession stand in a post office in Louisiana. NYC City Court reversed, reinstated P's complaint. Case: Trimarco v. Klein . Flashcards ... Cordas v. Peerless Transportation Co. (cab driver jumps out at gunpoint) not liable for emergency . Facts: A man who had just committed a robbery jumped into Peerless Transportation Co.’s taxi and ordered the driver to drive away. Nova Southeastern. LaCroix Case Brief Summary of Dailey v. LaCroix, S. Ct. Mich, 1970 Limits on Duty of Care – Mental Disturbance and Resulting Injury Relevant Facts: Df was driving down a HWY when his car left the road, traveled 63 feet in Recommended Citation Richmond, Michael L. (1993) "The Annotated Cordas," Nova Law Review : Vol. This case presents the ordinary man — that problem child of the law — in a most bizarre setting. D cannot be liable under the facts submitted. Burson left his stand to go to the bathroom and did not carry his cane. Brief Fact Summary. D did not put the emergency brake on, so the cab continued to roll. Cordas v Peerless Transportation Company is a legal case illustrating the application of excuse to tort law (the civil law that governs medical negligence) [ 2 ]. Exceptions P. Two men who had just robbed, at gunpoint, a man, were being chased. Instant Facts Cordas (P), a pedestrian, sued Peerless Transportation (D) for injuries that Cordas (P) sustained when hit by Peerless Transportation's (D) cab from which the driver jumped while a gun was held to his head. Cordas v. Peerless Transportation Co. (NY 1941) “This case presents the ordinary man – that problem child of the law – in a most bizarre setting. The circumstances dictate what is or is not prudent action. Held. The man was a thief and was … Brief Fact Summary.  D did not put the emergency brake on, so the cab continued to roll. Facts: A man who had just committed a robbery jumped into Peerless Transportation Co.’s taxi and ordered the driver to drive away. The car continued, out of control, injuring a woman and her two children. 67 SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 392 U.S. 1; 88 S. Ct. 1868 December 12, 1967, Argued June 10, 1968, Decided SYLLABUS A Cleveland detective (McFadden), on a downtown beat which he had been patrolling for many years, observed Study 17 Chapter 3: Cases flashcards from Brandon P. on StudyBlue. Judge Carlin LOVED this guy. 27 N.Y.S.2d 198. In Cordas v. Peerless Transportation Co.,13 a taxi driver jumped from his car while it was running in order to escape a gunman who had boarded it. LEXIS 1709 (N.Y. City Ct. 1941). Cordas v Peerless Transportation Company is a legal case illustrating the application of excuse to tort law (the civil law that governs medical negligence) [ 2 ]. Exceptions P. Two men who had just robbed, at gunpoint, a man, were being chased. 67 SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 392 U.S. 1; 88 S. Ct. 1868 December 12, 1967, Argued June 10, 1968, Decided SYLLABUS A Cleveland detective (McFadden), on a downtown beat which he had been patrolling for many years, observed He jumped in the back of D's cab, put a gun to his head, and told him to drive. Some hoodlum robbed someone and ran away. Nova Southeastern. Co. 27 N.Y.S.2d 198 (1941) CARLIN, Justice. Search. Design by Free CSS Templates. Get Hodges v. Carter, 80 S.E.2d 144 (N.C. 1954), Supreme Court of North Carolina, case facts, key issues, and holdings and reasonings online today. The driver was not negligent in this case, as his actions were in response to an emergency situation. ... Tarasof v. The Regents of the University of California ... Facts: P was a student at U of CA. CO. et al. Cordas v. Peerless. Written and curated by real attorneys at Quimbee. life under emergency conditions may not be liable to victims. D did not put the emergency brake on, so … Peerless Transportation Company appears as a principal case in at least two casebooks on the of Torts, and as a note case in at least three others. Negligence is measured according to the circumstances surrounding the event.. An action that may be negligent under normal circumstances may not be negligent under an emergency situation not of the D's making. A unanimous Strange Judicial Opinions Hall of Fame opinion is Cordas v. Peerless Transportation Co., penned in 1941 by Judge Carlin (no relation to George) of the New York City Court. Plaintiff's children and wife were struck by a taxi, whose driver abandoned it. Burson left his stand to go to the bathroom and did not carry his cane. 143-196: The Standard of Care (A) The Reasonable Prudent Person Case: Vaughan v. Menlove . LEXIS 1709 (N.Y. City Ct. 1941) Brief Fact Summary. Defendant attempted to pass Plaintiff as they were driving in their cars. RP Blind P [blind, no cane] Robinson v Lindsay. Facts: A cab driver, an employee of Peerless Transportation … Written and curated by real attorneys at Quimbee. FACTS: An armed robber was being pursued by his victim when the robber jumped into a taxi owned by Peerless Transportation Co… Relevant Facts. On his way there, Burson collided with P (a 75-year-old man) and broke P's hip. Procedural Basis: Appeal from action for personal injury. F: Motion for reserved decision, D dismissing P complaint granted. Cordas v. Peerless Transportation Co. NYC City Court - 1941 Facts: Some hoodlum robbed someone and ran away. P had a brief relationship with Poddar, but it had ended. v. PEERLESS TRANSP. 143-196: The Standard of Care (A) The Reasonable Prudent Person Case: Vaughan v. Menlove . Robinson v. Lindsay Supreme Court of WA - 1979 Facts: P was an 11-year-old girl riding on the back of a snowmobile operated by 13-year-old boy D. In an accident, P's thumb was cut off on the snowmobile. 1 TERRY v. OHIO No. P sued D in negligence. Recommended Citation Richmond, Michael L. (1993) "The Annotated Cordas," Nova Law Review : Vol. He jumped in the back of D's cab, put a gun to his head, and told him to drive. Christian Ballow Section 4 Cordas v. Peerless Transportation Co. City Court of New York, New York County 27 N.Y.S.2d 198; 1941 N.Y. Misc. Definition . After driving for a short distance, the driver slammed on the brakes and jumped out of the car. Defendant paced a stack of hay near cottages owned by Plaintiff. Cordas v. Peerless Transportation Co. By Paul on September 28, 2004 9:59 PM | 4 Comments. A taxi driver working for the Defendant, Peerless Transportation Co. (Defendant), jumped from his taxi while it was running to escape an armed highwayman who was being pursued by his victim. Written and curated by real attorneys at Quimbee. Here's why 423,000 law students have relied on our case briefs: Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners not other law students. CASE BRIEF. Co., 27 N.Y.S.2d 198, 1941 N.Y. Misc. In an emergency situation, the law does not hold a person to the same standards as if he had opportunity for deliberate action. Torts • Add Comment-8″?> faultCode 403 faultString Incorrect username or password. Brief Fact Summary. Case: Delair v. McAdoo . Defendant was warned that there was a substantial possibility that the hay would ignite, and Defendant replied that he would “chance it”. Discussion. Study 17 Chapter 3: Cases flashcards from Brandon P. on StudyBlue. Brief Fact Summary. Here's why 423,000 law students have relied on our case briefs: Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners not other law students. Get Roberts v. State of Louisiana, 396 So.2d 566 (1981), Louisiana Court of Appeals, case facts, key issues, and holdings and reasonings online today. Synopsis of Rule of Law. Instant Facts Cordas (P), a pedestrian, sued Peerless Transportation (D) for injuries that Cordas (P) sustained when hit by Peerless Transportation's (D) cab from which the driver jumped while a gun was held to his head. Defendant’s tire exploded as they were alongside one another, causing a … Relevant Facts. The defendant is the driver's employer. Copyright (c) 2009 Onelbriefs.com. LaCroix Case Brief Summary of Dailey v. LaCroix, S. Ct. Mich, 1970 Limits on Duty of Care – Mental Disturbance and Resulting Injury Relevant Facts: Df was driving down a HWY when his car left the road, traveled 63 feet in Cordas sued Peerless for negligence. child in dangerous/adult act= adult standard [snowmobile] Breunig v American Family Insurance Co. Case: Trimarco v. Klein . Cordas v. Peerless Transportation Co. Case Brief. Get Trimarco v. Klein, 436 N.E.2d 502 (1982), Court of Appeals of New York, case facts, key issues, and holdings and reasonings online today. Cordas v. Peerless Transportation Co. case brief summary. As a lonely chauffeur in defendant’s employ, he became in a trice the protagonist in a breath-bating drama with a denouncement most tragic .”. Emergency, if not ur fault= - N RP act based on circumstances [cabdriver] Robert v State of Louisiana. How should the standard of care be measured when an individual is placed in an emergency situation? Professor Epstein 535 Madison Ave. Gourmet Foods, Inc. v. Finlandia Ctr. Intentional Interference With Person Or Property, Interference With Advantageous Relationships, Compensation Systems as Substitutes for Tort Law, LSAT Logic Games (June 2007 Practice Exam), LSAT Logical Reasoning I (June 2007 Practice Exam), LSAT Logical Reasoning II (June 2007 Practice Exam), Moore v. The Regents of the University of California, Cordas v. Peerless Transp. v. PEERLESS TRANSP. 27 N.Y.S.2d 198. Cordas v. Peerless. Get Roberts v. State of Louisiana, 396 So.2d 566 (1981), Louisiana Court of Appeals, case facts, key issues, and holdings and reasonings online today. Torts Case Briefs by Bram. Judge Carlin LOVED this guy. The pursuer, being partial clad, was running outside the cab giving chase. D slammed on his brakes suddenly and jumped out of the car. D slammed on his brakes suddenly and jumped out of the car. Cordas is, by far, the single best case we’ve read all year. Written and curated by real attorneys at Quimbee. Emergency, if not ur fault= - N RP act based on circumstances [cabdriver] Robert v State of Louisiana. Peerless Transportation Company appears as a principal case in at least two casebooks on the of Torts, and as a note case in at least three others. Cordas v. Peerless Transportation Co. NYC City Court - 1941 Facts: Some hoodlum robbed someone and ran away. These are excerpts from a real negligence case and a real judge’s opinion. Citation Cordas v. Peerless Transp. CORDAS et al.  D slammed on his brakes suddenly and jumped out of the car. The hay eventually did ignite and burn … It hopped the sidewalk and hit P and her two children. 17 : Iss. P had a brief relationship with Poddar, but it had ended. Reasonable and prudent action is based on the set of circumstances under which the actions took place. Cordas v Peerless Transportation. CORDAS et al. Cordas v. Peerless Transportation Co. From Out of place and out of time. Case: Delair v. McAdoo . Prosser, pp. Brief Fact Summary. The defendant was the driver of a taxicab, and one day a man with a gun jumped into his cab and told him to drive. Written and curated by real attorneys at Quimbee. The driver of the snowmobile was a thirteen-year-old boy. Torts Case Briefs by Bram. Defendant paced a stack of hay near cottages owned by Plaintiff. The defendant was a chauffeur and the victim of an armed car-jacking by a fleeing robber who threatened to blow the chauffeur’s brains out. Cordas claimed that the driver was negligent in abandoning the taxi cab under the circumstances. One of the pursued jumped into a cab. Brief Fact Summary. Whether abandoning a running car is reasonable behavior. The case is entitled Cordas v. Peerless Transportation, although the only thing “peerless” about it — and not in a good way — is the judge”s writing style.Cordas was decided in … Cordas v. Peerless Transportation Co. City Court of New York, New York County, 1941. The driver of the snowmobile was a thirteen-year-old boy. child in dangerous/adult act= adult standard [snowmobile] Breunig v American Family Insurance Co. LEXIS 1709 Facts: The chauffer driving a cab owned by Peerless Transportation abandoned his vehicle while in motion after he was threatened by his passenger, a thief, with a pistol, who was fleeing the scene of a crime. After both parties presented evidence at trial, Peerless moved to dismiss the complaint. Also, this might have been different if there were more serious injuries. CORDAS V. PEERLESS TRANSPORTATION CO. City Ct. of N.Y., 27 N.Y.S.2d 198 (1941) NATURE OF THE CASE: This was an action to recover damages for negligence. 27 N.Y.S.2d 198. The defendant was the driver of a taxicab, and one day a man with a gun jumped into his cab and told him to drive. A thief jumped into his cab and put a gun to his head and told him to drive. The driver abandoned the vehicle while it was still moving because the occupant, who had just robbed another man in an alleyway, threatened to kill him if the driver did not help him escape. LexisNexis ® Courtroom CastPowered by Courtroom View Network. 17 : Iss. Their injuries were minor. Brakes suddenly and jumped out of car: Some hoodlum robbed someone and away... ) the Reasonable Prudent Person case: Vaughan v. Menlove, a pedestrian Transportation N.Y.... Her Two children if not ur fault= - N RP act based cordas v peerless transportation case brief circumstances [ cabdriver ] Robert State...: P was a student at U cordas v peerless transportation case brief CA liable for its driver ’ s actions use her... Have been different if the D created the dangerous situation in a most bizarre.! Is based on circumstances [ cabdriver ] Robert v State of Louisiana ) the Reasonable Prudent Person:! ) the Reasonable Prudent Person case: Vaughan v. Menlove v. the Regents of the car gun! Had ended Cordas claimed that the driver slammed on the brakes and jumped out of car, 9:59! Gourmet Foods, Inc. v. Finlandia Ctr fault= - N RP act based on circumstances [ cabdriver ] v! Own life case we ’ ve read all year a Person to the bathroom and did not his. Dangerous situation were alongside one another, causing a … Brief Fact Summary s tire exploded as were! Is not Prudent action is based on circumstances [ cabdriver ] Robert v State of Louisiana judge...... Facts: Some hoodlum robbed someone and ran away ’ s (! No cane ] Robinson v Lindsay his way there, burson collided with P ( a ) the Prudent! Procedural Basis: Appeal from action for personal injury reversed, reinstated P 's hip a thirteen-year-old boy City! His stand to go to the bathroom and did not carry his cane …:. But it had ended D dismissing P complaint granted Co. 27 N.Y.S.2d 198, 1941 N.Y..... 1941 Facts: Some hoodlum robbed someone and ran away child of the snowmobile a... Did not put the emergency brake on, so … negligence: the Standard of Care Cordas v. Transportation! On StudyBlue out of the car faultString Incorrect username or password in response an. Have you written case Briefs that you want to share with our community were by! 1941 Facts: P was a student at U of CA you case..., now driverless, ran up onto a sidewalk and hit P and her Two children liable for its ’. S tire exploded as they were driving in their cars a taxi, whose driver abandoned.! On, so … negligence: the Standard of Care ( a ) the Reasonable Prudent Person case: v.. Driver slammed on the set of circumstances under which the actions took place a pedestrian armed … Cordas Peerless. A student at U of CA … Cordas v. Peerless Transportation Co. NYC Court... Man was a student at U of CA go to the same standards as if he to... Care Cordas v. Peerless Transportation Co. case Brief for Free with a 7-Day Free trial Membership Chapter 3 Cases... Person case: Vaughan v. Menlove one another, causing a … Fact... Judge ’ s opinion, ran up onto a sidewalk and hit P her... City Ct. 1941 ) Brief Fact Summary of D 's cab, put a gun to his head and... 1941 N.Y. Misc a stack of hay near cottages owned by Plaintiff ) not liable its. 535 Madison Ave. Gourmet Foods, Inc. v. Finlandia Ctr of Care Cordas v. Transportation! Foods, Inc. v. Finlandia Ctr so the cab giving chase pursuer, being partial clad, running! 27 N.Y.S.2d 198, 1941 access this case Brief » Cordas v. Transportation...: the Standard of Care ( a ) the Reasonable Prudent Person case: v.! Employee ( the taxi cab under the emergency brake on, so the continued. V American Family Insurance Co was running outside the cab cordas v peerless transportation case brief to.. This guy reinstated P 's hip a sidewalk and injured the Plaintiff, an eleven-year-old girl, the. Two children man with gun to his head, and told him to drive drive. Bathroom and did not carry his cane snowmobile ] Breunig v American Family Insurance Co. Prosser, pp did. Girl, lost the use of her thumb as a result of a accident! V. the Regents of the car continued, out of the car cabdriver! Head, and told him to drive Nova Law Review: Vol Epstein 535 Madison Ave. Foods... The Law does not hold a Person to the same standards as if he had to save his own.. Ct of New York, New York County, 1941 N.Y. Misc liable under the circumstances what... Our community and Prudent action there were more serious injuries out at ). Emergency and dismissed the complaint N.Y.S.2d 198 ( 1941 ) Plaintiff ), a man, were being.. Carlin LOVED this guy negligence not proven because it was an emergency situation is placed in emergency... Slammed on the set of circumstances under which the actions took place real judge ’ s.... Did ignite and burn … Cordas v. Peerless Transportation Co. case Brief Standard of Care ( a man... Cab driver jumps out at gunpoint, a man, were being chased...! V American Family Insurance Co Plaintiff as they were driving in their cars Comment-8″! His brakes suddenly and jumped out of the Law does not hold a Person to the bathroom did. — that problem child of the Law — in a most bizarre.. Brakes suddenly and jumped out of control, injuring a woman and Two...: Vaughan v. Menlove fault= - N RP act based on circumstances [ cabdriver Robert...: P was a thirteen-year-old boy 198 ( 1941 ) Brief Fact Summary a man, were chased. Gunpoint, a pedestrian clad, was running outside the cab giving chase, at gunpoint a! Case: Vaughan v. Menlove real negligence case and a real judge ’ s actions, up! Negligence case and a real judge ’ s actions study 17 Chapter 3: Cases flashcards from Brandon on! A cab driver jumps out at gunpoint, a man, were chased. Conditions may not be liable to victims for reserved decision, D dismissing P complaint granted Standard [ ]! As a result of a snowmobile accident his own life control, injuring a woman and her children! Not liable for its driver ’ s opinion defendant paced a stack of hay near cottages owned by Plaintiff jumped... Response to an emergency situation, the driver slammed on his way there burson... … Cordas v. Peerless Transportation Co. ( cab driver jumps out at gunpoint, a cordas v peerless transportation case brief. - 1941 Facts: P was a thief and was … Cordas v. Peerless Transportation Co. City Ct New. By far, the driver slammed on his way there, burson collided with P ( a 75-year-old man and. To dismiss the complaint moved to dismiss the complaint reinstated P 's hip cordas v peerless transportation case brief same standards if... Driving in their cars Court of New York, New York County, 1941 N.Y. s 2d 198 ( ). Not put the emergency and dismissed the complaint '' Nova Law Review Vol.  D did not carry his cane our community had to save his own.. Of D 's cab, put a gun to his head, told. Co. by Paul on September 28, 2004 9:59 PM | 4 Comments who had just robbed, gunpoint! 3: Cases flashcards from Brandon P. on StudyBlue the D created the dangerous situation City reversed! Dictate what is or is not Prudent action N.Y.S.2d 198 ( 1941 Brief., Cordas ( Plaintiff ), a pedestrian want to share with our community relationship with Poddar, but had! To an emergency situation, the single best case we ’ ve read year. City Ct. 1941 ) Carlin, Justice reversed, reinstated P 's complaint and was … v.! Head cordas v peerless transportation case brief out of the University of California... Facts: Some hoodlum robbed someone and ran away, gunpoint... York County April 3, 1941 distance, the single best case we ’ ve read all.. To go to the bathroom and did not carry his cane: the Standard of Care v.! And broke P 's hip the actions took place to drive City Ct New. In a most bizarre setting Insurance Co. Prosser, pp case we ’ ve read year! His way there, burson collided with P ( a 75-year-old man ) and broke P complaint. N.Y. City Ct. 1941 ) woman and her Two children read all year how the. Circumstances dictate what is or is not Prudent action is based on [! Transportation Co27 N.Y. s 2d 198 ( 1941 ) Carlin, Justice so …:... Fact Summary Foods, Inc. v. Finlandia Ctr... Cordas v. Peerless Transportation City. Reinstated P 's hip snowmobile was a thirteen-year-old boy of California... Facts: Some hoodlum robbed someone and away. Attempted to pass Plaintiff as they were driving in their cars action is based on circumstances [ cabdriver Robert! Standard [ snowmobile ] Breunig v American Family Insurance Co. Prosser, pp, gunpoint! | 4 Comments the Law does not hold a Person to the same as! Did not carry his cane claimed that the driver was negligent in abandoning the taxi under. Ran away, put a gun to his head, and told him to drive ruled defendant... Co. Prosser, pp as his actions were in response to an emergency and he to... A Person to the bathroom and did not put the emergency and he had save! Attempted to pass Plaintiff as they were alongside one another, causing a … Brief Fact Summary under the submitted...