People ex rel. Sciford v. MacLean

New York Supreme Court

People ex rel. Sciford v. MacLean

11 N.Y.S. 353, 33 N.Y. St. Rep. 796, 58 Hun 603, 1890 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 742

DecidedOctober 24, 1890

StatusPublished

This text of 11 N.Y.S. 353 (People ex rel. Sciford v. MacLean) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People ex rel. Sciford v. MacLean, 11 N.Y.S. 353, 33 N.Y. St. Rep. 796, 58 Hun 603, 1890 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 742 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1890).

Pincite

Opinion

Van Brunt, P. J.

The relator was charged with neglect of duty in failing to arrest a man who committed an assault upon a girl in his presence, which resulted in her death. We find no evidence whatever to sustain the-dismissal of the relator in this case. It is true that he did not succeed in arresting the murderer as it was his duty to do; but the whole of the evidence-shows that the blow was given suddenly, unexpectedly, and without a word of warning, and that the relator immediately attempted to arrest the murderer, but was caught by the arm by the dying woman,.and swung partly round, and while freeing himself from her grasp the murderer got out of the-door, and temporarily escaped. We cannot see in this evidence proof of neglect of duty. The relator had been but a short time upon the force, and had not had consequently that experience which older members of the force have-acquired; and, if he did not succeed as well in the performance of his duty as some more experienced man might have done, such want of success affords-no ground of dismissal. If he did the best he could under the circumstances,, that is all that could be expected, as there was nothing to show absolute incapacity. The proceedings should be reversed, and the relator restored, with costs. All concur.

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

Van Brunt, P. J.

The relator was charged with neglect of duty in failing to arrest a man who committed an assault upon a girl in his presence, which resulted in her death. We find no evidence whatever to sustain the-dismissal of the relator in this case. It is true that he did not succeed in arresting the murderer as it was his duty to do; but the whole of the evidence-shows that the blow was given suddenly, unexpectedly, and without a word of warning, and that the relator immediately attempted to arrest the murderer, but was caught by the arm by the dying woman,.and swung partly round, and while freeing himself from her grasp the murderer got out of the-door, and temporarily escaped. We cannot see in this evidence proof of neglect of duty. The relator had been but a short time upon the force, and had not had consequently that experience which older members of the force have-acquired; and, if he did not succeed as well in the performance of his duty as some more experienced man might have done, such want of success affords-no ground of dismissal. If he did the best he could under the circumstances,, that is all that could be expected, as there was nothing to show absolute incapacity. The proceedings should be reversed, and the relator restored, with costs. All concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

11 N.Y.S. 353, 33 N.Y. St. Rep. 796, 58 Hun 603, 1890 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 742, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-ex-rel-sciford-v-maclean-nysupct-1890.