McGrath v. . N.Y.C. H.R.R.R. Co.
New York Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
Upon the first trial of this action, it was shown that the Rensselaer and Saratoga Railroad Company had always kept a flagman at the crossing where the accident under consideration happened, but that he was absent at the time of the accident; and the court charged the jury that these facts might be considered by them upon the question of defendant's negligence. Upon appeal to the General Term, this charge was held to have been erroneous, and a new trial was granted. (1 S.C. [T. C.], 243.) Upon the new trial, the plaintiff, against the objection of the defendant, was permitted to prove the…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Lake v. Atlantic WorksMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1872
- Beisiegel v. New York Central RailroadNew York Court of Appeals · 1869
- Weber v. . N.Y. Cen. H.R.R.R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1874
- McGrath v. . N.Y. Cen. H.R.R.R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1875
- Illinois Central Railroad v. KanouseIllinois Supreme Court · 1866
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by27 opinions
- Amberg v. . KinleyNew York Court of Appeals · 1915
- Schumer v. CaplinNew York Court of Appeals · 1925
- Knupfle v. . Knickerbocker Ice CompanyNew York Court of Appeals · 1881
- Heddles v. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1889
- Elias v. . Lehigh Valley R.R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1919
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.