Williams v. New York, N. H. & H. R. Co.

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York

Williams v. New York, N. H. & H. R. Co.

101 F. 375, 1900 U.S. App. LEXIS 5170

CourtU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York

DecidedMarch 27, 1900

StatusPublished

This text of 101 F. 375 (Williams v. New York, N. H. & H. R. Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Williams v. New York, N. H. & H. R. Co., 101 F. 375, 1900 U.S. App. LEXIS 5170 (circtsdny 1900).

Pincite

Opinion

WHEELEK, District Judge.

The plaintiff was a porter on one of defendant’s cars, and was accused by a passenger of picking up and keeping her poeketbook containing money. He was searched for it on the journey, and detained in the car for some time, and searched again by direction of officers of the defendant on the arrival of the train, without finding anything of the poeketbook or money. The [376]*376principal question on the trial was whether the plaintiff, for the exoneration of himself and the defendant, voluntarily remained, and. submitted himself to the searches. This question was so submitted to the jury that no exception was tallen in behalf of the plaintiff. The evidence as to this was‘so evenly balanced that the question was a fair one for the jury, and the finding upon it does not seem to have been influenced by any prejudice or improper motive. No valid ground appears for disturbing the verdict, and the motion to set it aside must be denied. Motion to set aside verdict denied, and judgment on the verdict for defendant.

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

WHEELEK, District Judge.

The plaintiff was a porter on one of defendant’s cars, and was accused by a passenger of picking up and keeping her poeketbook containing money. He was searched for it on the journey, and detained in the car for some time, and searched again by direction of officers of the defendant on the arrival of the train, without finding anything of the poeketbook or money. The [376]*376principal question on the trial was whether the plaintiff, for the exoneration of himself and the defendant, voluntarily remained, and. submitted himself to the searches. This question was so submitted to the jury that no exception was tallen in behalf of the plaintiff. The evidence as to this was‘so evenly balanced that the question was a fair one for the jury, and the finding upon it does not seem to have been influenced by any prejudice or improper motive. No valid ground appears for disturbing the verdict, and the motion to set it aside must be denied. Motion to set aside verdict denied, and judgment on the verdict for defendant.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

101 F. 375, 1900 U.S. App. LEXIS 5170, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/williams-v-new-york-n-h-h-r-co-circtsdny-1900.