Legal Opinion

Van Schaick v. . the Hudson River R.R. Co.

New York Court of Appeals

Decided January 30, 1871PublishedCited by 12 opinions

Appeal from a judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court in Third judicial department, affirming a judgment entered upon the verdict of a jury. The cause was tried at the Rensselaer circuit, in June, 1869. Plaintiff obtained a verdict for $5,000, upon which judgment was entered and affirmed at General Term. Defendant moved for a nonsuit at the close of plaintiff’s case, and also at the conclusion of the proofs.

Read the full summary

Appeal from a judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court in Third judicial department, affirming a judgment entered upon the verdict of a jury. The cause was tried at the Rensselaer circuit, in June, 1869. Plaintiff obtained a verdict for $5,000, upon which judgment was entered and affirmed at General Term. Defendant moved for a nonsuit at the close of plaintiff’s case, and also at the conclusion of the proofs. The plaintiff sued to recover damages, because of the death of George Van Santvoord, alleged to have been caused by the negligence of defendant, on the 6th day of March, 1863.…

1Opinion of the CourtFolger, J.

The questions in this case arise upon the defendant’s motion to nonsuit the plaintiff and dismiss the complaint. These questions are, was the defendant guilty of negligence, which caused the death of the plaintiff’s testator? Was the plaintiff’s testator guilty of negligence, which contributed to his death ?

It seems clear to us, from the undisputed facts, that the latter query should have been solved in the affirmative. And there being no dispute as to the evidence which in our view is controlling, the question was not one of fact for the jury, but of law for the court; and the learned…

2Cited by12 opinions

  1. Alabama Great Southern R. R. v. ArnoldSupreme Court of Alabama · 1887
  2. Henry v. St. Louis, Kansas City & Northern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1882
  3. East Tennessee, Virginia & Georgia Railroad v. KingSupreme Court of Alabama · 1886
  4. St. L., I. M. & S. Ry. v. MondaySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1887
  5. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fé Railroad v. Smith ex rel. SmithSupreme Court of Kansas · 1882

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

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

Powered by the Exa API