From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Katz v. Brooklyn Heights Railroad Co.

Supreme Court, Appellate Term
Jun 1, 1901
35 Misc. 302 (N.Y. App. Term 1901)

Opinion

June, 1901.

I. Cohn, for appellant.

Sheehan Collin, for respondent.


We have concluded not to interfere with the order opening defendant's default. The disposition of such matters rests so largely within the discretion of the trial justice that his discretion will not be disturbed, save in case of most manifest injustice. The order is affirmed, with ten dollars costs.

The second trial was submitted to the learned justice for decision, by consent, the jury having failed to agree. He ordered judgment for plaintiff in the sum of sixty-five dollars. This was the reasonable value of the services of the plaintiff's physician, as testified to on the trial. Having thus succeeded upon the issue of negligence, the plaintiff is without any compensation for his own injuries, being only repaid the reasonable value of his doctor's services. This is an injustice and cannot be tolerated.

Judgment reversed and new trial ordered, with costs.

Present: SCOTT, P.J., BEACH and FITZGERALD, JJ.

Judgment reversed and new trial ordered, with costs.


Summaries of

Katz v. Brooklyn Heights Railroad Co.

Supreme Court, Appellate Term
Jun 1, 1901
35 Misc. 302 (N.Y. App. Term 1901)
Case details for

Katz v. Brooklyn Heights Railroad Co.

Case Details

Full title:HENRY KATZ, Appellant, v . THE BROOKLYN HEIGHTS RAILROAD Co., Respondent

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Term

Date published: Jun 1, 1901

Citations

35 Misc. 302 (N.Y. App. Term 1901)
71 N.Y.S. 744

Citing Cases

Meditz v. Liggett Myers Tobacco Co.

Certainly, a cigarette containing an explosive substance may be considered a "thing of danger." As to the…