Grogan v. . Dooley
New York Court of Appeals
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the third judicial department, ■ entered May 9, 1912, affirming a judgment of the Albany County Court in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict. The nature of the action and the facts, so far as material, are stated in the opinion. It was reversible error to permit the plaintiff to show that one of the defendants had agreed to reimburse the plaintiff for his wages and doctor’s bills.
Read the full summary
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the third judicial department, ■ entered May 9, 1912, affirming a judgment of the Albany County Court in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict. The nature of the action and the facts, so far as material, are stated in the opinion. It was reversible error to permit the plaintiff to show that one of the defendants had agreed to reimburse the plaintiff for his wages and doctor’s bills. (Tennant v. Dudley, 144 N. Y. 504; Smith v. Bailey, 14 App. Div. 283; Slingerland v. Norton, 58 Hun, 578; O'Brien v. N. Y City R. Co.,…
1Opinion of the CourtCardozo, J.
The action is for personal injuries. The plaintiff was allowed to prove that the defendants offered to pay his wages while he was disabled, and also the bill of his physician. The evidence was received as involving an admission of liability. We think it had no such significance. The defendants’ offer was not made in response to any demand for compensation. It was not made in circumstances from which it might take form and color as a confession of fault. It was a voluntary act of mere benevolence. Nothing in the evidence permits it to be interpreted as anything else. We agree with the judgment…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Brice v. . BauerNew York Court of Appeals · 1888
- Corcoran v. . Village of PeekskillNew York Court of Appeals · 1888
- Sias v. Consolidated Lighting Co.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1901
- Tennant v. . DudleyNew York Court of Appeals · 1895
- Smith v. BaileyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1897
3Cited by15 opinions
- Dermatossian v. New York City Transit AuthorityNew York Court of Appeals · 1986
- Potts v. Armour & Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1944
- Danahy v. CuneoSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1943
- Briggs v. John Yeon Co., Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 1941
- Pellegrino v. New York City Transit AuthorityAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1991
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.