Case ID: misc_13/html/0403-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      \n      Per Curiam.\n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Alexander Neill, Respondent, v. The Brooklyn Elevated Railroad Co., Appellant.
    (City Court of Brooklyn—General' Term,
    June, 1895.)
    The plaintiff in an action for personal injuries cannot be compelled to remove his clothing and exhibit his injuries to the jury. .
    Appeal from judgment in favor of the plaintiff, entered upon a verdict, and from an order denying a motion for a new trial.
    Action to recover damages for personal injuries alleged to have been caused through the negligence of the defendant’s employees.
    Plaintiff, who was a night watchman, while sitting outside the premises he was employed to watch, was struck on the knee and thigh by a' large clinker which fell from one of defendant’s engines, causing serious injury thereto and incapacitating him from working at his ordinary occupation as a mechanical engineer. The jury returned a verdict for $6,000.
    
      Hoadly, Lauterbach di Johnson (Willia/m N. Cohen and Frederick P. Delafield, of counsel), for appellant.
    ■ James da Thomas H. Troy, for respondent.
   Per Curiam.

The learned counsel for the appellant contends that the damages awarded by the jury were excessive. We have very carefully read the appeal book and the briefs in the case, and, while the verdict was large, we do not think that we should exercise our power to reduce the damages.

The court was right in refusing to compel the plaintiff to remove his clothing and exhibit his knee to the jury. Roberts v. Ogdensburgh., etc., R. R. Co., 29 Hun, 154; McQuigan v. Delaware, etc., R. R. Co., 129 N. Y. 50; Elfers v. Woolley, 116 id. 294; Lyon v. Manhattan R. R. Co., 142 id. 298.

Judgment and order denying new trial affirmed, with costs.

Present: Clement, Oh. J., and Osborne, J.

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs.