Legal Opinion

Sharp v. Erie Railroad

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided January 15, 1904PublishedCited by 1 opinion

Appeal by the plaintiff, Charles F. Sharp, as administrator, etc., of George Sharp, deceased, from a judgment of the Supreme Court in favor of the defendant, entered in the office of the clerk of the county of Chemung on the 13th day of January, 1903, upon the dismissal of the complaint by direction of the court after a trial at the Chemung Trial Term, and also from an order entered in said clerk’s office on the 11th day of December, 1902, denying, the plaintiff’s motion for…

Read the full summary

Appeal by the plaintiff, Charles F. Sharp, as administrator, etc., of George Sharp, deceased, from a judgment of the Supreme Court in favor of the defendant, entered in the office of the clerk of the county of Chemung on the 13th day of January, 1903, upon the dismissal of the complaint by direction of the court after a trial at the Chemung Trial Term, and also from an order entered in said clerk’s office on the 11th day of December, 1902, denying, the plaintiff’s motion for a new trial made upon the minutes. The defendant operates a railroad through the village of Salamanca, in the town of…

1Opinion of the Court

Smith, J.:

The act of Wheeler was negligent, not willful. The natural inference is that he shot to- frighten without intent to wound. Plaintiff’s intestate had committed a misdemeanor in Wheeler’s presence. (Penal Code, § 426.) As a peace officer of the town in which this-shooting occurred, he was required to apprehend him and arrest him whether on or off the defendant’s right of way, and the failure to do so would have rendered him liable to prosecution as for a misdemeanor. (Penal Code, §§ 117, 154.) In making this arrest then, was Wheeler acting as a public officer with public duties, or…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Dickson v. WaldronIndiana Supreme Court · 1893
  2. Murray v. . DwightNew York Court of Appeals · 1900
  3. Tolchester Beach Improvement Co. v. SteinmeierCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1890
  4. Brill v. EddySupreme Court of Missouri · 1893
  5. Healey v. LothropMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1898

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Samuel v. WanamakerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1905

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

Powered by the Exa API