The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1866-02-17
ON THE ROAD.

O1v y IA = lSOAOs
~~~~>>~--~~->~-S>~~>>~~~~~~->
Conclusion OF the Moody OsS00d Suit
Summing Up or Counsel and Charge OF
Judge Foster-The Law I'm Relation %
Fast Driving Laid Down-verdiot In
Favor OF Mrs. Moody fer Three Thea
sand Five Hundred Dollars, &c. ~
SUPREME COUNT omoUrf-PARr III.
.ar ~ Before Judge POSTER n
Fm la-Kati1da A. Moody = GEr~ 4. 0looed-
This interesting SUIT brought TO close yesterday.
The court room was aed by parties desizous Of bearing
the concluding portions Of the case. ss y s.
At the sitting Of the court Mr. James W. Gerard
summed up for the defendant. He opened BY abiding
TO the fact that be had defend man, while his legal
opponent had woman for his client he called
the attention Of the jury 70 the necessity
Of controlling their sympathies for the sex,
20 that they might mot allow them to run
away with their Judgment he dweit on the reck.
out Of cars ferry boats and other public conveyanoes
ably dgested the evidence which gave any foundation
I the nass Of nssssnc. TO be applied 70 me
give the whole case their calm unbiased and clear con-
Mr. John McKeou followed ON behalf Of lSn. Moody,
strongly and eoquenty urging the claims Of his client
upon the jury and ponedy auding TO tho carelossnes
exercised BY "24o mem in driving through our streets
should be made In order to put end TO the many gla
ing outrages which were daily committed among IA
MI. McKeon, IN conclusion submitted some points OF
Judge Foster then charged the jury. He remarked
that the case was Of considerable interest 70 the
parties In It, as well as TO the public In general The
verdict Of the Jury whether II way the other
would conduce 70 settle, to soma extent at least the
we'll as those who were driving In city like New York
II essentially necessary to lay down appropriate
rules for tho OF those who passed along the
streets The plaintiff claimed to recover damages for
the negligent act Of the defendant in running over her
with sleigh. Before she could recover verdict at the
hands Of the jury two general propositions should DO
tabshed that she had ben injured by the defendant in
consequence OF his negligence and that she had not by
OF ner OWN @ IN any way 70 me Nv
the negligence of the PENDANT thcn was not necessary
to allude to that branch of the case avan The first
question whether the evidence did or did not satisfy
the nry that the defendant guilty of negligence as
regarded the accident 1t undispued evidence that
,hs sre DETACHED and Mrs. Moody passed nom
the platform the street. Defendant had been driving
through Harlem lane IN company with his brother.
| They were followed by Mr. Hasett and Mr. Ogle. He
phe defendan had been travelling at very fair pace
Their coming by several witnesses who were In
about the Adratic Hotel. Some Of those Witnesses
others to 10 to the nile. The testimony Of witnesses
| tho opposite side was that they were going at
expressions It was for the jury to make
| up their minds ns to this ratio OF speed
according TO the testimony presented AS matter O law
streets OF N,w York. the hazard of the lives Of pedes
TRANS un IS he could keep his horse under perfect
traL This the principle laid down in the case
! ported in the 24ih OF New York. II an action
brougA By lady for loss sustained In the death OF
her husband who was killed in attempting to cross
railroad track with his horse and wagon II was claimed
the part of plaintiff that the railroad company pro-
ceeded improper speed that they dd not give the
necessary caution Evidence produced on tho other
side to show that they had given the proper caution
The court held that II negligence on the part Of
plaintiff to drive the track al such rate OF speed
| that he could not control his horses and stop
| them in time, before col ding with tho train.
The defendant had business TO shout at the planhG
but he bound 70 get out or the way himself 1t was
the business Of tho dsfcsdant to keep clear OF the wo
man he saw her Was she nesligcnts She looked up
and down the avenue on the platform and then started
across tho street The question was, whether sho
thought that she had reasonable ground suppose she
could cross tho stre before tho sleigh upon her.
Defendant said that she had kept her course ho
woc1 Lave Isssed her vshcs injury That was mat
TOR OF opinion and a. ssc tho Jury shcuid take into
In connection with the other circumstances
Of the Tho defendant calie ont . her cnoe o.
twice Why call out 70 her at all q che could have es
capped by keeping cuf judge Fo9sr then went on "a
ldaate the AfGsront 81 In ebs evidences.
and alnded 70 the nature Of the damages 70 which Ma
Moody entitled. whea he closed his able charge
l. The Jury then retired and after short debcratlon
brought IN verdctof 81, 500 FOR plaintiff @ 1a.