Sweet v. Metropolitan Street Railroad

City of New York Municipal Court

Sweet v. Metropolitan Street Railroad

18 Misc. 355, 41 N.Y.S. 549, 75 N.Y. St. Rep. 937

DecidedOctober 15, 1896

StatusPublished

This text of 18 Misc. 355 (Sweet v. Metropolitan Street Railroad) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering City of New York Municipal Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Sweet v. Metropolitan Street Railroad, 18 Misc. 355, 41 N.Y.S. 549, 75 N.Y. St. Rep. 937 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1896).

Pincite

Opinion

Van Wyck, Ch. J.

The plaintiff sues to recover damages sustained by him by reáson of personal injuries to his wife through-defendant’s negligence. The husband certainly can recover in such action damages caused by loss of his wife’s domestic services, the expenses necessarily incurred by him by reason of her injuries and the loss of her society and the comforts thereof; while the wife has her action for the general damages from- the injury to- her person, and for the loss of her earning power over and above her domestic services. Loudon v. Cunningham, 1 Misc. Rep. 408; 20 N. Y. Supp. 882. The wife’s cause of action for the general damages for her personal injuries dies, with her; therefore, if she had been the plaintiff herein, taking the inquest, it would not have been unreasonable to have required the defendant to stipulate, as a condition for opening the default and setting aside the inquest, that if she should die before the cause was retried final judgment might be entered upon the decision and findings of the jury on the inquest, for otherwise the defendant, although guilty of negligence, would, by reason of her death and the setting aside of the inquest, entirely escape liability for her cause of action unless her death had resulted from its negligence. But in this case the plaintiff is the husband, whose cause of action for the wife’s injuries will not die with her and his cause and the proof thereof could have been fully protected by requiring'the defendant to stipulate as a condition for setting aside the inquest, .that, in case of her death before the trial of the cause, then that her testimony, as taken on the in-, quest, or at plaintiff’s option as more fully taken on her immediate examination, before trial, should be read upon the- trial. And the order appealed from will be so modified and affirmed, without costs.

Eitzsimoks and Schttchmah, JJ.,. concur.

Order modified and affirmed, with costs.

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

Van Wyck, Ch. J.

The plaintiff sues to recover damages sustained by him by reáson of personal injuries to his wife through-defendant’s negligence. The husband certainly can recover in such action damages caused by loss of his wife’s domestic services, the expenses necessarily incurred by him by reason of her injuries and the loss of her society and the comforts thereof; while the wife has her action for the general damages from- the injury to- her person, and for the loss of her earning power over and above her domestic services. Loudon v. Cunningham, 1 Misc. Rep. 408; 20 N. Y. Supp. 882. The wife’s cause of action for the general damages for her personal injuries dies, with her; therefore, if she had been the plaintiff herein, taking the inquest, it would not have been unreasonable to have required the defendant to stipulate, as a condition for opening the default and setting aside the inquest, that if she should die before the cause was retried final judgment might be entered upon the decision and findings of the jury on the inquest, for otherwise the defendant, although guilty of negligence, would, by reason of her death and the setting aside of the inquest, entirely escape liability for her cause of action unless her death had resulted from its negligence. But in this case the plaintiff is the husband, whose cause of action for the wife’s injuries will not die with her and his cause and the proof thereof could have been fully protected by requiring'the defendant to stipulate as a condition for setting aside the inquest, .that, in case of her death before the trial of the cause, then that her testimony, as taken on the in-, quest, or at plaintiff’s option as more fully taken on her immediate examination, before trial, should be read upon the- trial. And the order appealed from will be so modified and affirmed, without costs.

Eitzsimoks and Schttchmah, JJ.,. concur.

Order modified and affirmed, with costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

18 Misc. 355, 41 N.Y.S. 549, 75 N.Y. St. Rep. 937, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sweet-v-metropolitan-street-railroad-nynyccityct-1896.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack