Post v. . Brooklyn Heights R.R. Co.
New York Court of Appeals
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered December ■ 14, 1901, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict, and an order denying a motion for a new trial.
Read the full summary
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered December ■ 14, 1901, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict, and an order denying a motion for a new trial. This action was brought to recover damages for negligence resulting in personal injury, and at the opening of the case the defendant admitted “ that the collision alleged in the complaint occurred because of the negligence of the defendant’s servant or servants.” Ho motion for a nonsuit, or to dismiss the complaint, was made at the close of all the…
1Per curiam
There are errors in this record, but we find none calling for reversal, when the circumstances under which the erroneous rulings were made and their probable effect on the result are taken into account. Under our system of appeals every error does not require a new trial, for the vast judicial work of the state could not be done on that basis. Unless the error is so substantial as to raise a presumption of prejudice, it should be disregarded, for undue delay is a denial of justice. We think that the evidence received, subject to objection and exception, could have had no effect on the final…
2Cited by15 opinions
- Wallace v. . WallaceNew York Court of Appeals · 1915
- Engel v. . United Traction Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1911
- Schoenherr v. HartfieldAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1916
- Weibert v. HananAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1910
- Walter v. JolineAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1910
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.