Legal Opinion

Van Tassel v. New York, Lake Erie & Western Railroad

New York Court of Common Pleas

Decided November 7, 1892PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Appeal from special term. Action by John Van Tassel against the New York, Lake Erie & Western Railroad Company for alleged injuries sustained by plaintiff, a brakeman in defendant’s employ, because of the defective condition of a brake step, the use of which he claimed to be essential to the operation of the brake attached to one of defendant’s cars. Defendant appeals from an order denying a motion for a new trial on the grounds of surprise and newly-discovered evidence.

Read the full summary

Appeal from special term. Action by John Van Tassel against the New York, Lake Erie & Western Railroad Company for alleged injuries sustained by plaintiff, a brakeman in defendant’s employ, because of the defective condition of a brake step, the use of which he claimed to be essential to the operation of the brake attached to one of defendant’s cars. Defendant appeals from an order denying a motion for a new trial on the grounds of surprise and newly-discovered evidence. Affirmed.

1Opinion of the CourtBischoff, J.

The motion for a new trial on the ground of newly-discovered evidence and surprise was properly denied, and for the facts transpiring on the trial reference may be had to the opinion on the appeal from the judgment in this action which is herewith handed down. 20 N. Y. Supp. 708. The alleged newly-discovered evidence is not such, in fact. It consists of the train book kept by the conductor of the train running from Gfreycourt to New-burgh on August 22, 1888, the day of the accident of which plaintiff complained, the train book kept by the conductor of the train leaving Newburgh on the day…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Selden v. . the Del. Hud. Canal Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1864
  2. Lawrence v. . ElyNew York Court of Appeals · 1868
  3. Van Tassel v. New York, Lake Erie & Western RailroadNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1892
  4. Hartman v. Morning Journal Ass'nNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1892

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. In re the Estate of PetersonNew York Surrogate's Court · 1910
  2. Suken v. MetcalfeAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1924

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

Powered by the Exa API