Legal Opinion

Mixsell v. New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad

New York Supreme Court

Decided December 15, 1897PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Motion to set aside a verdict and for a new trial.

1Opinion of the CourtRussell, J.

The plaintiff recovered by verdict of a jury $30,000 for the negligent killing of her deceased husband, Dr. Mixsell. The motion to set aside the verdict, dismiss the complaint or award a new trial, brings up interesting questions under the present practice as to the effect of special findings by a jury in a common-law case, considered in connection with the evidence as, applied to the contributory negligence of the deceased. Those special findings were taken under the amendment of 1895, allowing the.court to submit to the jury such questions of fact and the assessment of damages pending a…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Riggs v. . PalmerNew York Court of Appeals · 1889
  2. Elliott v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1893
  3. McNamara v. . New York Central and Hudson River Rd. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1892
  4. Lortz v. New York Cent. & H. R. RailroadNew York Supreme Court · 1894
  5. Vahue v. New York Central & Hudson River RailroadAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1897

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Strauss v. ScottNew York Supreme Court · 1899
  2. Griffith v. Metropolitan Street Railway Co.New York Supreme Court · 1900

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API