
    FRANK LEENIG, RESPONDENT, v. NEW YORK CENTRAL AND HUDSON RIVER RAILROAD COMPANY, APPELLANT.
    Argued June 25, 1914
    Decided November 16, 1914.
    On appeal from the Supreme Court, in which court the following per curiam was filed:
    “The question whether the defendant exercised the high degree of care required for the safety of the plaintiff, a passenger, was for 'the jury, in view of the proof that the gates on the dock were opened before the ferry-boat was adjusted to the dock.
    “The question whether the plaintiff was guilty of contribute y negligence was also under the proof for the jury.
    “We see no error in the refusal of the judge to charge as requested.
    “The judgment will be affirmed, with costs.”
    Tor the appellant, Vreclenburgh, Wall & Carey.
    
    For the respondent, Weller & Lichiensiein.
    
   Pee Curiam.

The judgment under review herein should be affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the per curiam opinion of the Supreme Court.

For affirmance — The Chancellor, Chiee Justice, Swayze, Parker, Bergen, Bogeet, Vredbnburgh, Heppenheimek, Williams, JJ. 9.

For reversal, — None.  