From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Donohue v. Brooklyn, Q.C. S.R.R. Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 1, 1900
53 App. Div. 348 (N.Y. App. Div. 1900)

Opinion

July Term, 1900.

Charles C. Clark, for the appellant.

S.D. Morris, for the respondent.


The action is brought to recover damages resulting from the negligence of the defendant. The plaintiff recovered $1,136 for bodily injuries and for "injuries to her head and limbs." She called her sister as a witness. The record shows that counsel for plaintiff put this question: "Has your sister continued to complain of pains in her head ever since the accident up to the present day? [Objected to. Objection overruled. Defendant excepts.] A. Yes, sir." The question was plainly objectionable, for it called for declarations of a party made subsequent to the injury. ( Roche v. Brooklyn City Newtown R.R. Co., 105 N.Y. 294; Reed v. N.Y. Central R.R. Co., 45 id. 574; Olp v. Gardner, 48 Hun, 169; Ryan v. Porter Manufacturing Co., 57 id. 253.) There is no force in the respondent's contention that the general objection was insufficient, for if it had been taken or had been recast in specific terms, there was no way in which the question could have been made admissible. ( Tozer v. N.Y.C. H.R.R.R. Co., 105 N.Y. 659; Silberstein v. Houston R.R. Co., 117 id. 293; Tooley v. Bacon, 70 id. 34.)

The claim for damages was largely based upon pains in the head and upon mental distress. After the plaintiff none was called as a witness save the sister and the attending physician, whose visits were few. It cannot be assumed that the evidence admitted was harmless.

The judgment and order should be reversed and a new trial granted.

All concurred.

Judgment and order reversed and a new trial granted, costs to abide the event.


Summaries of

Donohue v. Brooklyn, Q.C. S.R.R. Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 1, 1900
53 App. Div. 348 (N.Y. App. Div. 1900)
Case details for

Donohue v. Brooklyn, Q.C. S.R.R. Co.

Case Details

Full title:EMMA DONOHUE, Respondent, v . THE BROOKLYN, QUEENS COUNTY AND SUBURBAN…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Jul 1, 1900

Citations

53 App. Div. 348 (N.Y. App. Div. 1900)