Case ID: nys_16/html/0850-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Per Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Gillespie v. Coney Island & B. R. Co.
    
      (City Court of Brooklyn, General Term.
    
    November 23, 1891.)
    Street-Cars—Negligence—Collision—Speed of Car.
    While plaintiff was a passenger in defendant’s street-car, he was thrown down by a collision, and injured. Defendant’s negligence was admitted, and the only issue was as to the quantum of damages. Held, that plaintiff could show the speed of the car at the time in order to prove the violence of his fall.
    Appeal from trial term.
    Action by Frank V. Gillespie, an infant, etc., against the Coney Island & Brooklyn Eailroad Company to recover dámages for injuries sustained in a collision between two of defendant’s electric cars, in one of which defendant was riding. The negligence of defendant was admitted, and the only question in issue was as to the quantum of damages. Plaintiff was permitted to testify as to the speed at which the car was running at the time of the accident. From a judgment entered ón a verdict for $980.79 in favor of plaintiff, and from an order denying a motion for a new trial, defendant appeals.
    Affirmed.
    Argued before Clement, C. J., and Osborne, J.
    
      H. W. Slocum, Jr., for appellant. Backus & Manne, for respondent.
   Per Curiam.

We think that the plaintiff had the right to prove the speed of the car; such proof would have a tendency to show the violence of the fall of the plaintiff. We have carefully examined the record in this case, and concluded that no error was committed by the judge or the jury on the trial.

Judgment and order denying new trial affirmed, with costs.