Case Name: Abram Fox, Resp't, v. The Brooklyn City Railroad Company, App'lt
Court: Brooklyn City Court
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1894-02
Citations: 58 N.Y. St. Rep. 540
Docket Number: 
Parties: Abram Fox, Resp’t, v. The Brooklyn City Railroad Company, App’lt.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York State Reporter
Volume: 58
Pages: 540–540

Head Matter:
Abram Fox, Resp’t, v. The Brooklyn City Railroad Company, App’lt.
(Brooklyn City Court, General Term
Filed February 1894.)
Negligence—Stkeet bailboad.
In an action for negligence, the fact that the company’s driver drove the car against a wagon standing across the track and about to enter a stable over the sidewalk, which threw plaintiff from the car upon the street, justifies a finding of negligence on the part of the company.
Appeal from judgment in favor of plaintiff, entered upon verdict for $2,500, and from order denying motion for a new trial on the minutes.
Action to recover for injuries sustained by plaintiff by reason of the negligence of the defendant.
Morris & Whitehouse, for app’lt; M. L. Towns, for resp’t.

Opinion:
Van Wyck, J.
After critical examination and careful consideration of all the evidence in this case,we see no reason to disturb the verdict, which seems to be fully justified on the questions both of negligence and of the amount of damages. According to-the testimony which the jurors seem to have credited, as they had a right to do, it appears that the driver of defendant's car (upon which plaintiff was a passenger standing on the front platform) drove the car against a wagon standing across the track and about to enter a stable over the sidewalk. The collision threw plaintiff upon the street; his side was hurt, his foot was seriously and permanently injured, there being a complete loss of sensation from the ankle to the toes, and a partial loss of motion. His foot was exposed to the jury, and the physicians tested tbe loss of sensation in their presence. He was confined to his home for six weeks and suffered great pain, was under the care of the physician for a considerable time, and was unable to do hard work at the time of the trial.
The judgment and order must be affirmed, with costs.
Osborne, J., concurs.
Judgment and order affirmed, with costs.