Corcoran v. Ulster & Delaware Railroad

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Corcoran v. Ulster & Delaware Railroad

40 N.Y.S. 1117, 9 A.D. 621, 75 N.Y. St. Rep. 432

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedSeptember 29, 1896

StatusPublished

This text of 40 N.Y.S. 1117 (Corcoran v. Ulster & Delaware Railroad) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Corcoran v. Ulster & Delaware Railroad, 40 N.Y.S. 1117, 9 A.D. 621, 75 N.Y. St. Rep. 432 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1896).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

There was, perhaps, sufficient evidence, though slight, upon the question of negligence on the part of the defendant, and the lack of contributory negligence on the part of the plaintiff, to warrant the submission of those questions to the jury. We are not, however, satisfied that the evidence shows any such injury to the plaintiff as warranted the jury in awarding her the sum of $1,000 as compensation therefor. We do not feel disposed to enter upon the discussion of the evidence in relation to her injuries, ' and the loss occasioned to her thereby. It would, perhaps, be hardly fair to the plaintiff to do so in the event of there being a new trial. We think the verdict should be set aside as excessive, and a new trial granted, unless the plaintiff, within 30 days after service of a copy of the order embodying this decision, stipulates to reduce the amount of the damages to the sum of $500, in which event the judgment, as so modified, should be affirmed, without costs of this appeal to either party.

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

PER CURIAM.

There was, perhaps, sufficient evidence, though slight, upon the question of negligence on the part of the defendant, and the lack of contributory negligence on the part of the plaintiff, to warrant the submission of those questions to the jury. We are not, however, satisfied that the evidence shows any such injury to the plaintiff as warranted the jury in awarding her the sum of $1,000 as compensation therefor. We do not feel disposed to enter upon the discussion of the evidence in relation to her injuries, ' and the loss occasioned to her thereby. It would, perhaps, be hardly fair to the plaintiff to do so in the event of there being a new trial. We think the verdict should be set aside as excessive, and a new trial granted, unless the plaintiff, within 30 days after service of a copy of the order embodying this decision, stipulates to reduce the amount of the damages to the sum of $500, in which event the judgment, as so modified, should be affirmed, without costs of this appeal to either party.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

40 N.Y.S. 1117, 9 A.D. 621, 75 N.Y. St. Rep. 432, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/corcoran-v-ulster-delaware-railroad-nyappdiv-1896.