Case ID: ny_76/html/0607-03.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Per Curiam\n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Albert Kenyon, by Guardian, etc., Respondent, v. The New York Central and Hudson River Railroad Company, Appellant.
    This court has no power to amend a record of the Supreme Court; any amendment must be sought in that court.
    (Re-argued January 19, 1879;
    decided February 18, 1879.)
    
      This was an action to recover damages for negligence. (Reported below, 5 Hun, 479.)
    The defendant’s counsel claimed error in a portion of the charge. In the return to this court no exception appeared to the portion of the charge complained of. It appeared by affidavits that the exception was taken on the trial, but did-not appear in the case filed in the court below! Defendant’s counsel asked to have the return amended by inserting the exception. Held, as above.
    
      J. Thomas Spriggs for appellant.
    
      Alfred G. Coxe for respondent.
   Per Curiam

mem. for affirmance.

All concur.

Judgment affirmed.