Seybolt v. New York, Lake Erie & Western Railroad

New York Supreme Court

Seybolt v. New York, Lake Erie & Western Railroad

38 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 100

DecidedDecember 15, 1883

StatusPublished

This text of 38 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 100 (Seybolt v. New York, Lake Erie & Western Railroad) 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

Seybolt v. New York, Lake Erie & Western Railroad, 38 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 100 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1883).

Pincite

Opinions

Barnard, P. J.:

The deceased was a postal clerk, and the defendant was a carrier of the mails for the government by contract. It was a part of this contract that the postal clerks should be carried free. In such cases the clerks are passengers and entitled to protection as such. (Blair v. The Erie Railway, 66 N. Y., 313.) The clerk was not traveling upon a free pass. The government officers made requisition for passes under the contract and the defendant sent one, with a condition upon the back of the pass making the recipient agree to waive his right to sue for injuries occasioned by the negligence of the railroad company. This was not a part of the contract between the government and the defendant, nor o.f the contract between the government and the deceased. There was no basis for such a restriction upon the carrying of the clerk. There was no consider[102]*102ation moving either between the government or deceased and the defendant. The question of fact properly arising upon the evidence having been found in favor of the plaintiff, the judgment should be affirmed, with costs.

Pratt, J., concurred.

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

Barnard, P. J.:

The deceased was a postal clerk, and the defendant was a carrier of the mails for the government by contract. It was a part of this contract that the postal clerks should be carried free. In such cases the clerks are passengers and entitled to protection as such. (Blair v. The Erie Railway, 66 N. Y., 313.) The clerk was not traveling upon a free pass. The government officers made requisition for passes under the contract and the defendant sent one, with a condition upon the back of the pass making the recipient agree to waive his right to sue for injuries occasioned by the negligence of the railroad company. This was not a part of the contract between the government and the defendant, nor o.f the contract between the government and the deceased. There was no basis for such a restriction upon the carrying of the clerk. There was no consider[102]*102ation moving either between the government or deceased and the defendant. The question of fact properly arising upon the evidence having been found in favor of the plaintiff, the judgment should be affirmed, with costs.

Pratt, J., concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

38 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 100, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/seybolt-v-new-york-lake-erie-western-railroad-nysupct-1883.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack