Corbett v. Twenty-Third Street Railway Co.

21 N.E. 1033, 114 N.Y. 579, 24 N.Y. St. Rep. 538, 69 Sickels 579, 1889 N.Y. LEXIS 1131
CourtNew York Court of Appeals
DecidedJune 25, 1889
StatusPublished
Cited by9 cases

This text of 21 N.E. 1033 (Corbett v. Twenty-Third Street Railway Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Corbett v. Twenty-Third Street Railway Co., 21 N.E. 1033, 114 N.Y. 579, 24 N.Y. St. Rep. 538, 69 Sickels 579, 1889 N.Y. LEXIS 1131 (N.Y. 1889).

Opinion

Follett, Ch. J.

This action is for a recovery of damages for a personal injury (Code of Civ. Pro. § 1343, subd. 9), and the rule of the common law that such an action abates on the death of the plaintiff is not changed by section 164 of the Code of Civil Procedure, unless a verdict, report or decision has been rendered upon the issues. ¡Neither a verdict nor a report has been rendered in this action. The word “ decision,” as used in this section, refers to a decision made by a court upon a trial of issues without a jury. (Code of Civ. Pro. § 1343, subd. 5.) This action was not tried by the court without a jury, and the nonsuit is not a decision within the meaning of section 164. The order of the General Term reversing the judgment entered on the nonsuit was not made upon the hearing or trial of the issues, and is not a decision within the meaning of the section last cited.

The stipulation given by the defendant upon appealing to this court does not prevent the abatement of the action. The law-making power did not intend that the stipulation provided for in subdivision 1 of section 191 should relate to or affect the survivability of causes of action, or the abatement of actions; nor did either of the parties to this action intend that the stipulation should affect or have any relation to the abatement of the action, or to the survivability of the cause" of action. The action has abated and the court is without powerto revive it.

The motion to revive should be denied, with costs.

All concur.

Motion denied.

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

Related

Vermont Marble Co. v. Eastman
101 A. 151 (Supreme Court of Vermont, 1917)
Iron Gate Bank v. Brady
184 U.S. 665 (Supreme Court, 1902)
Vitto v. Farley
6 A.D. 481 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1896)
Martin's Administrator v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad
151 U.S. 673 (Supreme Court, 1894)
Peetsch v. Quinn
6 Misc. 50 (City of New York Municipal Court, 1893)
Cooper v. St. Paul City Ry. Co.
56 N.W. 588 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1893)
Campbell v. Gallagher
9 N.Y.S. 432 (Superior Court of New York, 1890)
Pierson v. Morgan
1 Silv. Sup. 82 (New York Supreme Court, 1886)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
21 N.E. 1033, 114 N.Y. 579, 24 N.Y. St. Rep. 538, 69 Sickels 579, 1889 N.Y. LEXIS 1131, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/corbett-v-twenty-third-street-railway-co-ny-1889.