Clark v. . Union Ferry Company
New York Court of Appeals
This . was an action for damages for the loss of plaintiff’s horse, &c., from defendant’s boat. The plaintiff was on defendant’s boat, with his horse and cart, to cross the ferry. The horse was young, and as plaintiff was attempting to drive him off of the boat, he reared up, became frightened and backed against the chain at the rear of the boat.
Read the full summary
This . was an action for damages for the loss of plaintiff’s horse, &c., from defendant’s boat. The plaintiff was on defendant’s boat, with his horse and cart, to cross the ferry. The horse was young, and as plaintiff was attempting to drive him off of the boat, he reared up, became frightened and backed against the chain at the rear of the boat. The chain broke, from a defect in the iron, which was, as the witness termed it, “ half puddled iron, and very roughly half puddled.” There was no dispute as to this defect. There was contradictory evidence as to the management of the horse by the…
1Opinion of the CourtPeokham, J.
An individual has a right to take a young horse on a ferry-boat. He may be tiniid, easily frightened, and yet the owner is guilty of no negligence in taking him on the boat. He must there exercise proper care in the management of the horse, and that is all that can be required of him. If he then be injured or lost through the negligence of the defendant, the ferry, the defendant, is liable. The negligence of the defendant here, in not having a proper hook in its chain, was clearly proved and not controverted.
As to the negligence or unskillful conduct of the plaintiff in the management of the…
2Cited by10 opinions
- City of Crawfordsville v. SmithIndiana Supreme Court · 1881
- Kennedy v. . MayorNew York Court of Appeals · 1878
- Wyckoff v. . Queens County Ferry Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1873
- Sturgis v. KountzSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1895
- The Garden CityDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1886
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.