McGarity v. New York City Railway Co.

51 Misc. 666, 101 N.Y.S. 191
CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York
DecidedJuly 1, 1906
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 51 Misc. 666 (McGarity 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
McGarity v. New York City Railway Co., 51 Misc. 666, 101 N.Y.S. 191 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1906).

Opinion

Dowling, J.

At the time this action was commenced, the plaintiff was a minor; before the day of trial he had become of full age. This latter fact appeared upon the cross-examination, and the defendant thereupon amended its answer by setting up want of capacity in plaintiff to sue and moved to dismiss the complaint which was granted. This was error. The omission to appoint a guardian for an infant plaintiff is at most an irregularity, and does not affect the jurisdiction of the court. Goodfriend v. Robins, 92 N. Y. Supp. 240; Rima v. Rossie Iron Works, 120 N. Y. 433. The plaintiff having arrived at full age before the time of trial, the action should not have been dismissed. Smart v. Haring, 14 Hun, 375; Sims v. N. Y. College of Dentistry, 35 id. 344.

Gildebsleeve, J., concurs; Dugbo, J., taking no part.

Judgments reversed and new trials ordered, with costs to appellant to abide event.

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

Related

Pacilio v. Scarpati
165 Misc. 586 (City of New York Municipal Court, 1937)
Winterroth v. Cox
75 Misc. 467 (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 1912)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
51 Misc. 666, 101 N.Y.S. 191, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcgarity-v-new-york-city-railway-co-nyappterm-1906.