Horrigan v. New York Central & Hudson River Railroad
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Appeal by the plaintiff, Patrick Horrigan, from a judgment of the Supreme Court in favor of the defendant, entered in the office of the clerk of the county of Onondaga on the 25th day of January, 1895, upon a nonsuit granted by the court after a trial before the court and a jury at the Onondaga Circuit. The plaintiff requested to have the case submitted to the jury and his request was denied and an exception was taken.
Read the full summary
Appeal by the plaintiff, Patrick Horrigan, from a judgment of the Supreme Court in favor of the defendant, entered in the office of the clerk of the county of Onondaga on the 25th day of January, 1895, upon a nonsuit granted by the court after a trial before the court and a jury at the Onondaga Circuit. The plaintiff requested to have the case submitted to the jury and his request was denied and an exception was taken. An exception was taken when the motion for a nonsuit was granted. The action was brought to recover the' damages resulting from personal injuries sustained by the plaintiff by…
1Opinion of the Court
Hardin, P. J.:(1) There -is a. presumption that the judgment of nonsuit was properly granted.(2) There is no certificate in the appeal book that the case contains all the evidence introduced upon the trial. (Gorham Mfg. Co. v. Seale, 3 App. Div. 515.)(3) There was no motion for a new trial on the minutes. The only exceptions reviewable are those taken to the refusal to submit the case to the jury and to the granting of the motion for a nonsuit.
It is quite apparent from the evidence that whatever defects or imperfections existed in the car or derrick were known by the plaintiff prior to the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Gorham Manufacturing Co. v. SealeAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1896