Cosselmon v. . Dunfee
Cases that cite this one
64 later published cases cite this decision. The 25 that cite it most often are listed here.
- Regan v. Frontier Elevator & Mill Co. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1924)
- Capital Construction Co. v. Holtzman (D.C. Cir. 1906)
- Lipschutz v. Ross (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York 1903)
- Hey v. Huss (City of New York Municipal Court 1957)
- Butcher v. Stull (W. Va. 1954)
- Nicholas v. Rosenthal (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1953)
- Brown v. Walter (2d Cir. 1933)
- F. W. Woolworth Co. v. Davis (10th Cir. 1930)
- Faris v. Burroughs Adding Machine Co. (Idaho 1929)
- Moorefield v. Lewis (W. Va. 1924)
- Arnold v. California Portland Cement Co. (Cal. Ct. App. 1919)
- Third Ave. Ry. Co. v. Mills (2d Cir. 1918)
- New Ætna Portland Cement Co. v. Hatt (6th Cir. 1916)
- Inland Steel Co. v. Gillespie (Ind. 1914)
- Prager v. Glanzer (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York 1908)
- Anderson v. Standard Plunger Elevator Co. (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York 1908)
- Cunningham v. Heidelburger (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York 1905)
- Iverson v. McDonnell (Wash. 1904)
- Lassig v. Barsky (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York 1904)
- Blumberg v. Marks (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York 1904)
- Somers v. Jacobs (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York 1904)
- Strickland v. New York Central & Hudson River Railroad (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1903)
- Paley v. Brust (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1964)
- Kern v. News Syndicate Co. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1963)
- Swanson v. Evans Oil Inc. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1961)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
We affirm' this judgment without opinion, but feel constrained to refer to an occurrence on the trial that has become too frequent in negligence cases.
Counsel for plaintiff asked a witness for defendants this question: “ Do you know whether they carry insurance for accident to their employees ? ” This question was objected to as incompetent and objection”sustained.
While the learned trial judge made a proper disposition of the matter, nevertheless the propounding of the question was calculated to convey an improper impression to the jury.
The inquiry into the matter of insurance is not material and the practice of asking a question that counsel must be assumed *508 to know cannot be answered is highly reprehensible, and where the trial court or Appellate Division is satisfied that the verdict of the jury has been influenced thereby it should, for that reason, set aside the verdict.
■The judgment and order should be affirmed, with costs. Parker, Oh. J., Gray, Bartlett, Haight, Martin, Yann, and Werner, JJ., concur.
Judgment and order affirmed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.