Weckmann v. Am Ende

Superior Court of New York

Weckmann v. Am Ende

5 N.Y.S. 567, 1889 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2523

CourtThe Superior Court of the City of New York and Buffalo

DecidedMay 6, 1889

StatusPublished

This text of 5 N.Y.S. 567 (Weckmann v. Am Ende) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering The Superior Court of the City of New York and Buffalo primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Weckmann v. Am Ende, 5 N.Y.S. 567, 1889 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2523 (superctny 1889).

Pincite

Opinion

Freedman, J.

The record contains no exception to any refusal to charge, and the exceptions taken to the matters charged are so general as to raise no question for review. The testimony of the plaintiff made out a prima facie case of negligence on the part of the defendant, and the testimony given by and on behalf of the defendant did no more than to create a conflict which had to be submitted to the jury. The motions of the defendant for a dismissal of the complaint, made at the close of plaintiff’s ease and at the close of the testimony on both sides, were therefore properly denied. Under all the circumstances the verdict of the jury cannot be disturbed. The judgment and order appealed from should be affirmed, with costs.

Sedgwick, C. J., concurs.

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

Freedman, J.

The record contains no exception to any refusal to charge, and the exceptions taken to the matters charged are so general as to raise no question for review. The testimony of the plaintiff made out a prima facie case of negligence on the part of the defendant, and the testimony given by and on behalf of the defendant did no more than to create a conflict which had to be submitted to the jury. The motions of the defendant for a dismissal of the complaint, made at the close of plaintiff’s ease and at the close of the testimony on both sides, were therefore properly denied. Under all the circumstances the verdict of the jury cannot be disturbed. The judgment and order appealed from should be affirmed, with costs.

Sedgwick, C. J., concurs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

5 N.Y.S. 567, 1889 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2523, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/weckmann-v-am-ende-superctny-1889.