Camden & Amboy Railroad & Transportation Co. v. Belknap
New York Supreme Court
Error from the superior court of the city of New York. " Belknap brought an action on the case in the court below against the company, as common carriers between New York and Philadelphia, for the loss of his baggage, being a trunk and its contents, of the value of $300.. The defendants pleaded not guilty.
Read the full summary
Error from the superior court of the city of New York. " Belknap brought an action on the case in the court below against the company, as common carriers between New York and Philadelphia, for the loss of his baggage, being a trunk and its contents, of the value of $300.. The defendants pleaded not guilty. On the trial before Ch. J. Jones, it appeared that the company had two offices in the city of New York, the one at number 12, and the other at number 14, Washington street. In August, 1833, the plaintiff with his family arrived in the city of New York, in the steam boat from Hartford,…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Bronson, J.
When the judge’s charge is not confined to a brief statement of the points of law, but extends to a review of the whole case, any particular remark which may be deemed exceptionable should be pointed out at the time. The judge will thus have the opportunity of explaining, qualifying or correcting what he has said; and if he refuse to do so, the party will then have a pointed *360exception, upon which his right to a review cannot be questioned. So too, where the judge lays down a number of .egal propositions for the guidance of the jury, some of which are deemed…
2Cited by24 opinions
- Cook v. Champlain Transportation Co.Court for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1845
- Fish v. Chapman & RossSupreme Court of Georgia · 1847
- Blanchard v. NestleNew York Supreme Court · 1846
- Dorr v. . New Jersey Steam Navigation CompanyNew York Court of Appeals · 1854
- Greene v. . WhiteNew York Court of Appeals · 1867
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.