Muryn v. New York Central Railroad

Second Circuit

Muryn v. New York Central Railroad

270 F.2d 645

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit

DecidedOctober 7, 1959

DocketNo. 9, Docket 24770

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 270 F.2d 645 (Muryn v. New York Central Railroad) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Muryn v. New York Central Railroad, 270 F.2d 645 (2d Cir. 1959).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiff, having consented to go to the jury on the factual issues, by his failure to move for a directed verdict, will not be heard now to challenge the verdict for the defendant on the ground of the insufficiency of the evidence. Jorgensen v. York Ice Machinery Corporation, 2 Cir., 1947, 160 F.2d 432.

In any event, we are of the opinion that a jury question was presented by the evidence regarding the operation by the defendant’s employee of an electrical [646]*646transporter, as a result of which a three foot iron pipe was thrown through the air striking and injuring the plaintiff.

Judgment affirmed in open court.

WATERMAN, Circuit Judge, concurs in the result.

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