Daily v. New York & New Haven Railroad

32 Conn. 356
CourtSupreme Court of Connecticut
DecidedFebruary 15, 1865
StatusPublished
Cited by8 cases

This text of 32 Conn. 356 (Daily v. New York & New Haven Railroad) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Connecticut primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Daily v. New York & New Haven Railroad, 32 Conn. 356 (Colo. 1865).

Opinion

Hinman, O. J.

Two questions are raised by the plaintiff upon this record. First, that the court erred in rejecting [358]*358certain declarations of the deceased made after he received the injury for which the action is brought, and while he was under a sense of impending dissolution ; and secondly, that the court erred in permitting the defendants to prove gross negligence in the deceased which materially contributed to the injury. The superior court was most clearly correct upon both of these questions.

Dying declarations are only admissible in criminal cases, where the death of the deceased is the subject of the charge, and the circumstances of the death the subject-matter of the declaration. There are very few cases any where in which this rule has been departed from, and we have always acted upon the well settled law of England on the subject. I he King v. Mead, 2 Barn. & Cress., 605; Wilson v. Boerem, 15 Johns., 286; The King v. Lloyd, 4 Car. & P., 233.

In regard to proof that the negligence of the deceased contributed to produce his injury, the case is not. distinguishable in principle from that of Havens v. The Hartford and New Haven R. R. Co., 28 Conn., 69, in which this subject underwent a very thorough examination. That case was like this, a hearing in damages after the defendants’ demurrer had been overruled, and proof was introduced to show that the wrongful acts of the plaintiff himself contributed to his injury.

We do not advise a new trial.

In this opinion the other judges concurred.

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

Related

Ross v. Cooper
164 N.W. 679 (North Dakota Supreme Court, 1916)
State v. Nist
118 P. 920 (Washington Supreme Court, 1911)
Merritt v. New York, New Haven, & Hartford Railroad
38 N.E. 447 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1894)
Higgins v. Central New England & Western Railroad
29 N.E. 534 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1892)
Crane v. Eastern Transportation Line
48 Conn. 361 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1880)
Batchelder v. Bartholomew
44 Conn. 494 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1877)
Carey v. Day
36 Conn. 152 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1869)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
32 Conn. 356, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/daily-v-new-york-new-haven-railroad-conn-1865.