Leszczynski v. Pennsylvania Railroad

274 A.D. 1003, 84 N.Y.S.2d 579, 1948 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4458
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedDecember 13, 1948
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 274 A.D. 1003 (Leszczynski v. Pennsylvania 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
Leszczynski v. Pennsylvania Railroad, 274 A.D. 1003, 84 N.Y.S.2d 579, 1948 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4458 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1948).

Opinion

In an action under the Federal Employers’ Liability Act (U. S. Code, tit. 45, § 51 et seq.) to recover damages for the wrongful death of plaintiffs’ intestate, defendant appeals from a judgment in favor of plaintiffs, after [1004]*1004trial before the court without a jury. Judgment modified on the law by striking therefrom the sum of $10,549.50, the interest on the court’s award, computed from the date of decedent’s death. As so modified, the judgment is unanimously affirmed, without costs. The findings of fact are affirmed. Under the Federal doctrine applicable in cases under the Federal Employers’ Liability Act, there was ample proof to support the court’s finding that decedent met his death because of defendant’s negligence, while he was engaged in the performance of his duties as an employee upon the train which killed him. (Hanley v. Erie R. R. Co., 273 App. Div. 257, and cases cited therein.) It was error, however, to add interest from the date of death to the amount of plaintiffs’ damages as fixed by the trial court. (Murmann v. New York, New Haven & Hartford R. R. Co., 258 N. Y. 447.) As plaintiffs have not cross-appealed, this court may not pass upon their contention that the damages awarded below were inadequate. (Kelsey v. Western, 2 N. Y. 500; Matter of Burk, 273 App. Div. 1012.) Neither may we consider, as proper argument, the intemperate statements contained on pages 8 and 9 of respondents’ brief. Such statements, unsupported by the record, have no place in a brief submitted to this court. Present — Nolan, P. J., Johnston, Adel, Sneed and Wenzel, JJ.

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

Related

Gregoire v. National Bank of Alaska
413 P.2d 27 (Alaska Supreme Court, 1966)
Swider v. Delaware & Hudson Railroad
3 Misc. 2d 975 (New York Supreme Court, 1950)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
274 A.D. 1003, 84 N.Y.S.2d 579, 1948 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4458, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/leszczynski-v-pennsylvania-railroad-nyappdiv-1948.