Dibble v. New York & Erie Rail Road
New York Supreme Court
THIS was all action by the plaintiffs, as administrators of Richard Dibble deceased, to recover damages of the defendants, for causing the death of the intestate.
Read the full summary
THIS was all action by the plaintiffs, as administrators of Richard Dibble deceased, to recover damages of the defendants, for causing the death of the intestate. The injuries, in consequence of which the intestate was alleged to have died, were received by him while a passenger in the cars of the defendants, upon- their road, at Owego, on the 9th of January, 1852, through the carelessness and negligence of the defendants, by means of which the cars ran off the track and fell down a steep bank. After the injuries were received, and on the 21st of February, 1852, the defendants settled with…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Johnson, J.
The most material question in this case is, whether any right of action accrued to the plaintiffs *185by reason of the death of Richard Dibble, conceding such death to have been caused by the wrongful act, neglect or default of the defendants. The defendants’ counsel, at the close of the evidence, requested the judge to charge the jury that the receipt produced in evidence, showing that the defendants had settled with the deceased, in his lifetime, and paid him in full his claim for the injury, was a bar to the plaintiffs’ action. The judge refused so to charge, and…
2Cited by21 opinions
- Holton v. DalyIllinois Supreme Court · 1882
- Littlewood v. . Mayor, Etc., of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1882
- South & North Alabama Railroad v. SullivanSupreme Court of Alabama · 1877
- Fluor Corporation v. Super. Ct.California Supreme Court · 2015
- Kelliher v. . N.Y.C. H.R.R.R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1914
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.