Akersloot v. Second Avenue Railroad

15 N.Y.S. 864, 1891 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 166
The Superior Court of the City of New York and Buffalo·Decided August 27, 1891·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Freedman, J.

Upon the facts disclosed at the trial, the question of negligence on the part of the person having charge of the infant plaintiff at the time of the occurrence complained of, and the question of defendant’s negligence, were questions for the jury, and they were fully and fairly submitted, under a charge which carefully guarded every right which the defendant had. There was no error in the charge or the refusals to charge otherwise, and the jury were expressly instructed to determine the case upon their own recollection of the evidence, and not upon any allusion of the trial judge as to his recollection of certain particulars. . Nor can it be held that, under all the circumstances, the verdict of $12,000 for the loss of plaintiff’s leg, and the suffering connected with it, is excessive in amount. Upon the whole case, no substantial reason appears why the verdict of the jury should be disturbed. The judgment and order should be affirmed, with costs. All concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Akersloot v. Second Avenue Railroad, 15 N.Y.S. 864, 1891 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 166 (superctny 1891).

15 N.Y.S. 864 (Akersloot v. Second Avenue Railroad) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Merchants & Miners Transportation Co. v. Corcoran
62 S.E. 130 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1908)
Ansteth v. Buffalo Railway Co.
9 Misc. 419 (The Superior Court of New York City, 1894)
Ansteth v. Buffalo Railway Co.
61 N.Y. St. Rep. 702 (Superior Court of Buffalo, 1894)