Koester v. New York City Railway Co.

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Koester v. New York City Railway Co.

96 N.Y.S. 117

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedNovember 29, 1905

StatusPublished

This text of 96 N.Y.S. 117 (Koester v. New York City Railway Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Koester v. New York City Railway Co., 96 N.Y.S. 117 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1905).

Pincite

Opinion

SCOTT, P. J.

On a former appeal a judgment in favor of plaintiff was reversed, because in the opinion of this court the evidence preponderated in behalf of the defendant. 90 N. Y. Supp. 375. On the second trial, with a record subject to no legal objection, the jury have again found in plaintiff’s favor. On both trials the plaintiff’s evidence, if believed, would have justified the verdict. There is nothing to indicate that the jury were influenced by passion, prejudice, or partiality, and I do not think that we can justify a second reversal upon a pure question of fact. The verdict was, however, in my opinion excessive, and should be reduced.

The judgment will therefore be reversed, and a new trial granted, with costs to appellant to abide the event, unless the plaintiff will stipulate to reduce the judgment to $1,159.90, in which case the judgment, as reduced, will be affirmed, without costs of this appeal. All concur.

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

SCOTT, P. J.

On a former appeal a judgment in favor of plaintiff was reversed, because in the opinion of this court the evidence preponderated in behalf of the defendant. 90 N. Y. Supp. 375. On the second trial, with a record subject to no legal objection, the jury have again found in plaintiff’s favor. On both trials the plaintiff’s evidence, if believed, would have justified the verdict. There is nothing to indicate that the jury were influenced by passion, prejudice, or partiality, and I do not think that we can justify a second reversal upon a pure question of fact. The verdict was, however, in my opinion excessive, and should be reduced.

The judgment will therefore be reversed, and a new trial granted, with costs to appellant to abide the event, unless the plaintiff will stipulate to reduce the judgment to $1,159.90, in which case the judgment, as reduced, will be affirmed, without costs of this appeal. All concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

96 N.Y.S. 117, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/koester-v-new-york-city-railway-co-nyappterm-1905.