Kieffer v. Metropolitan Street Railway Co.
Frank Kieffer v. The Metropolitan Street Railway Co.
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
Per Curiam.
This action was brought to recover damages for injuries to person and property, resulting from defendant’s alleged negligence in causing defendant’s car to collide with plaintiff’s wagon. At the close of plaintiff’s case a motion was made to dismiss the complaint, whereupon the justice granted the motion, and in addition thereto directed a verdict for the defendant. This was a manifestly erroneous disposition of the case. We think the evidence required the submission of the case to the jury, but even assuming that the justice was right in believing that the motion to dismiss should be granted, it was improper to direct a verdict for the defendant. It was also improper to render a judgment such as the record discloses. In the Municipal Court, where a plaintiff does not prove his cause of action, the judgment should simply provide that the action is dismissed, with costs, without prejudice to a new action. § 1382, Consol. Act.
Present: Beekmae, P. J., Giegebich and O’Gobmae, JJ.
Judgment reversed, and new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide event.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 3 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.