Case Name: Mary Lynch, Resp't, v. The Third Avenue R. R. Co., App'lt
Court: New York Superior Court General Term
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1891-02-04
Citations: 36 N.Y. St. Rep. 431
Docket Number: 
Parties: Mary Lynch, Resp’t, v. The Third Avenue R. R. Co., App’lt.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York State Reporter
Volume: 36
Pages: 431–433

Head Matter:
Mary Lynch, Resp’t, v. The Third Avenue R. R. Co., App’lt.
(New York Superior Court, General Term,
Filed February 4, 1891.)
Negligence—Evidence.
In an action for injuries caused by negligence, the only allegation as to the character of the injury was that plaintiff “sustained serious damage to her person and property.” Evidence was admitted, under objection, as .to the permanent character of the injury. Held, that the exception to the admission of the evidence was not of sufficient importance to call for reversal.
(Ingbaham, J., dissents.)
Appeal from judgment entered upon the verdict of a jury, and .from order denying defendant’s motion for a new trial.
William N. Cohen, for app’lt; Henry W. Bates, for resp’t.

Opinion:
Freedman, J.
The action was brought to recover damages for personal injuries sustained by the plaintiff in attempting to •get on board of one of the cars of the defendant Upon the testi mony of the plaintiff the case was one for the jury, and the trial judge properly refused to dismiss the complaint or to direct a verdict. There is no exception to the charge, or to any refusal to-charge otherwise. None of the exceptions taken to the admission or exclusion of evidence is, under all the circumstances, of sufficient importance to call for reversal, and upon the whole case no valid reason appears for disturbing the verdict.
The judgment and order should be affirmed, with costs.
Sedgwick, Ch. J., concurs.