Dorr v. McCullough
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Motion by the plaintiff, Susan Dorr, as administratrix, etc., of Peter Dorr, deceased, for a new trial upon a case containing exceptions, ordered to he heard at the Appellate Division in the first instance, upon a nonsuit granted by the court after a trial at a Trial Term of the Supreme Court, held in and for the county of Erie on the ,11th day of March, 1896. This action was brought to recover the damages resulting from the alleged negligence of the New York, Lake Erie and…
Read the full summary
Motion by the plaintiff, Susan Dorr, as administratrix, etc., of Peter Dorr, deceased, for a new trial upon a case containing exceptions, ordered to he heard at the Appellate Division in the first instance, upon a nonsuit granted by the court after a trial at a Trial Term of the Supreme Court, held in and for the county of Erie on the ,11th day of March, 1896. This action was brought to recover the damages resulting from the alleged negligence of the New York, Lake Erie and Western Railroad Company, occurring on the 7th day of March, 1895, which railroad at that time was being operated…
1Opinion of the Court
Hardin, P. J.:
Plaintiff was burdened with the duty of showing that the intestate was free from contributory negligence. Ho direct proof of freedom from negligence of the intestate was given, and the facts and circumstances disclosed did not warrant a finding hy the jury that the intestate was free from contributory negligence. If we could assume upon the facts that it was sufficient to raise a doubt whether the intestate was free from contributory negligence, and that the circumstances pointed as much to the negligence of the deceased as to its absence, or that the circumstances point in…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Wiwirowski v. Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Railway Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1891
- Waldele v. New York Central & Hudson River RailroadAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1896