Case Name: Reuben T. Pettengill, Resp't, v. The City of Yonkers, App'lt
Court: New York Supreme Court, General Term
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1888-05-14
Citations: 15 N.Y. St. Rep. 854
Docket Number: 
Parties: Reuben T. Pettengill, Resp’t, v. The City of Yonkers, App’lt.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York State Reporter
Volume: 15
Pages: 854–855

Head Matter:
Reuben T. Pettengill, Resp’t, v. The City of Yonkers, App’lt.
(Supreme Court, General Term, Second Department,
Filed May 14, 1888.)
Husband and wipe—Bight op husband to becover por loss op service op wipe.
Where the right of a wife to recover for her injuries caused by the negligence of defendant had been decided by the court: Held, that the right of the husband to recover for loss of services of his wife and his expenses incident to such injuries followed that determination.
Appeal from a judgment in favor of the plaintiff entered upon a verdict rendered by a jury at the Westchester county circuit and from an order denying a new trial.
The facts proved were practically the same as those proved in the case of Francis Pettengill v. Same Defendant (see 4 N. Y. State Rep., 830). The plaintiff’s wife received serious injuries by having the carriage in which she was riding overturned by running against or upon an embankment upon which were pipes, lying in the road bed on Yonkers avenue, one of the streets in the city of Yonkers. At the time of the accident the horse that was drawing the carriage in which the plaintiff and his wife were riding, was traveling on a walk, and it was so dark that plaintiff could not see the horse’s head from the carriage. This obstruction had existed in said street about two months prior to the night in question, and at the time of the accident there was neither light upon nor railing nor guard about it.
Joseph F. Daly, for app’lt; James M. Hunt, for resp’t.

Opinion:
Dykman, J.
—This is an action by the husband for the loss arid expenses incurred by him by reason of injuries sustained by his wife through the negligence of the defendant.
The right of the wife to recover for her injuries has been settled by the general term (4 N. Y. State Rep., 830), and the right of the husband to recover for loss of services of his wife and his expenses incident to such injuries follows that •determination.
The judgment should therefore be affirmed, with costs.
Barnard, P. J., and Pratt, J., concur.