Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 1904

Keuhner v. Metropolitan Street Railway Co.

Keuhner v. Metropolitan Street Railway Co.
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · Decided June 23, 1904 · MacLean
88 N.Y.S. 1055 (New York Supplement)

Counsel

Bayard H. Ames and F. Angelo Gaynor, for appellant., Joseph Steiner, for respondent.

Keuhner v. Metropolitan Street Railway Co.

Dissenting Opinion

MacLEAN, J. (dissenting).

I dissent on the ground that the learned judge erred in refusing the request to charge the jury that there was no evidence in the case that the conductor of the car was negligent—Monroe v. Met. St. Ry. Co., 79 App. Div. 587, 590, 80 N. Y. Supp. 177-—of especial importance in a cause wherein the preponderance of evidence for the plaintiff was so dubious.

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

The case presents nothing more than the usual conflict of evidence in such cases. It was fairly submitted to the jury, and no reason appears why their verdict should be disturbed. The defendant having duly excepted to the granting of the extra allowance, the judgment must be modified by deducting the allowance. Standard Trust Company v. N. Y. C. & H. R. R. R. Co., 178 N. Y. 407, 70 N. E. 925.

Since the error in granting the allowance does not affect the merits, the judgment as modified will be affirmed, with costs to respondent.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.