Crumbie v. Manhattan Railway Co.
New York Supreme Court
Appeal from special term, New York county. Action by Ann E. Crumbie against the Manhattan Bailway Company to enjoin the operation of defendant’s elevated railroad in the street in front of plaintiff’s premises, known as “Nos. 363-365^ Bowery.”* After plaintiff had introduced evidence in support of her case, the court, of its own motion, suspended the trial, and made an order of reference to William S. Andrews, Esq., “to take testimony as to the amount of damage, if any,…
Read the full summary
Appeal from special term, New York county. Action by Ann E. Crumbie against the Manhattan Bailway Company to enjoin the operation of defendant’s elevated railroad in the street in front of plaintiff’s premises, known as “Nos. 363-365^ Bowery.”* After plaintiff had introduced evidence in support of her case, the court, of its own motion, suspended the trial, and made an order of reference to William S. Andrews, Esq., “to take testimony as to the amount of damage, if any, suffered by the plaintiff by reason of the maintenance and operation by .the defendant of its elevated railroad in front of…
1Opinion of the Court
PEB CUBIAM.
It now seems to be well settled that the court should not make such an order of reference as was made in this case. Upon the trial the defendant had the right to take the objection that the evidence sought to be introduced had not been taken according to law. Suppose a party participates in a de bene esse examination, unless the evidence is certified to the court according *498to law such evidence cannot be used upon a trial. The party does not waive these statutory requisites by appearance upon the taking of the testimony. So, in the case at bar, when it was sought to read upon the…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Archuleta v. ArchuletaSupreme Court of Colorado · 1912
- Ewing v. O'MalleyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1904
- Jarvis v. BrennanNew York Supreme Court · 1895