Hirschberg v. Brooklyn, Queens County & Suburban Railroad
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Appeal by the defendant, the Brooklyn, Queens County and Suburban Railroad Company, from an order of the Supreme Court, made at the Kings County Trial Term and entered in the office of the clerk of the county of Kings on the 21st day of December, 1908, granting the plaintiff’s motion for a new tidal.
1Opinion of the Court
Miller, J.:
This is a negligence action. The complaint is that, as the plaintiff was attempting to board one of the defendant’s cars, it started before he had got in a position of safety. At the close of the plaintiff’s case the court granted a nonsuit. The court denied the plaintiff’s motion to reopen the case to put in additional evidence, but granted a new trial for the purpose of enabling the plaintiff to do that; and the complaint of the appellant on this appeal is that" the trial court should not grant a new trial solely for the purpose of giving a party another chance to present his…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Dochtermann v. Brooklyn Heights RailroadAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1898
- Morrison v. . B. S.A.R.R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1891
- Dochtermann v. . Brooklyn Heights Railroad CompanyNew York Court of Appeals · 1900
- Pfeffer v. Buffalo Railway Co.The Superior Court of the City of New York and Buffalo · 1893
- Sexton v. Metropolitan Street Railway Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1899
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Lang v. Interborough Rapid Transit Co.Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1912