Judge v. Interurban Street Railway Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Judge v. Interurban Street Railway Co.

112 A.D. 895, 97 N.Y.S. 1138

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

DecidedMarch 15, 1906

StatusPublished

This text of 112 A.D. 895 (Judge v. Interurban Street Railway Co.) 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

Judge v. Interurban Street Railway Co., 112 A.D. 895, 97 N.Y.S. 1138 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1906).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam:

The jury rendered a verdict in favor of plaintiff for fifty dollars damages. The trial court set it aside as inadequate and granted a new trial. Plaintiff’s, injuries were not serious, but were somewhat substantial. Had the. trial court refused to set the verdict aside it is not certain that on appeal we would have disturbed such determination. On the other hand, the trial court Laving set it aside, we do not feel that we should interfere with the disposition [896]*896so made. The order: should,' therefore, be affirmed, with costs, Present.r^O’Brien, P. J.; Patterson, McLaughlin, Laughlin and Houghton, JJ( Order affirmed, with costs. Order filed. " -

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

Per Curiam:

The jury rendered a verdict in favor of plaintiff for fifty dollars damages. The trial court set it aside as inadequate and granted a new trial. Plaintiff’s, injuries were not serious, but were somewhat substantial. Had the. trial court refused to set the verdict aside it is not certain that on appeal we would have disturbed such determination. On the other hand, the trial court Laving set it aside, we do not feel that we should interfere with the disposition [896]*896so made. The order: should,' therefore, be affirmed, with costs, Present.r^O’Brien, P. J.; Patterson, McLaughlin, Laughlin and Houghton, JJ( Order affirmed, with costs. Order filed. " -

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

112 A.D. 895, 97 N.Y.S. 1138, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/judge-v-interurban-street-railway-co-nyappdiv-1906.