Case Name: GODDARD et al. v. MOONEY
Court: New York City Court
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1899-03-28
Citations: 57 N.Y.S. 223
Docket Number: 
Parties: GODDARD et al. v. MOONEY.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's New York Supplement
Volume: 57
Pages: 223–224

Head Matter:
GODDARD et al. v. MOONEY.
(City Court of New York, General Term.
March 28, 1899.)
Instructions—Error.
It is not error for the court in its charge to refer to items of damage testified to, to refresh the jurors’ memory.
Appeal from trial term. •
Action by Warren N. Goddard and another against James J. Mooney. There was a judgment for plaintiffs, and defendant appeals.
Affirmed.
Argued before FITZSIMONS, C, J., and HASCALL, J.
John E. Duffy, for appellant.
Gruber & Bonynge, for respondents.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
We do not agree with appellant that the trial justice, in charging the jury, fixed the amount of the verdict which plaintiff would be entitled to receive if they rendered a verdict in his favor. On the contrary, he charged that, if plaintiff was entitled .to a verdict, the jury should fix the amount thereof. In his charge the justice did refer to several items of damage which were testified to by plaintiff's witnesses. These items were correctly recited in •the charge. It was not error to recite these items. They were ap parently presented to the jury by him for the purpose of.refreshing their memory, and' not for the purpose of limiting and '-fixing the amount of their verdict. We think that the evidence shows thát the injuries complained of were caused solely by reason of the .negligence of the defendant, and that plaintiff was free from contributory negligence. The verdict, was not excessive.
The judgment must be affirmed, with costs.