Boetgen v. New York & H. Railroad
New York Supreme Court
Action by William Boetgen against New York & Harlem Railroad Company for personal injuries. There was a verdict for defendant, and plaintiff moved for a new trial. Denied.
1Opinion of the CourtMcADAM, J.
Unless the nature of the accident affords prima facie proof of negligence, there must be some evidence as to the cause of the occurrence tending to prove the negligence alleged. The mere happening of the accident will not suffice. The plaintiff must go further, and give affirmative evidence of the existence of actionable negligence. If the proof only suggests the possibility of negligence, it is insufficient. Whart. Neg. § 421; Shear. & R. Neg. (4th Ed.) § 56. “In an action founded upon negligence, the burden of proof, of course, rests upon the plaintiff. * * It is certainly the duty of the…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Reynolds v. New York Central & Hudson River RailroadNew York Court of Appeals · 1874
- Weston v. . City of TroyNew York Court of Appeals · 1893
- Cordell v. New York Central & Hudson River RailroadNew York Court of Appeals · 1878
- Wiwirowski v. Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Railway Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1891
- Whalen v. . Citizens' Gas Light Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1896
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.