Lauck v. Metropolitan Street Railway Co.
LAUCK v. METROPOLITAN ST. RY. CO.
Headnotes
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.
CONLAN, J.
The action was brought to recover for injuries alleged to have been inflicted by the negligence of the defendant, and the result of this appeal may very well rest upon the submission of the case to the jury, and the verdict rendered in consequence thereof. The evidence was in conflict as to- how the injury was caused, but the charge to the jury was so eminently fair to both sides that neither was heard to complain. It is a remarkable incident in connection with the submission to the jury that questions vital to the issue were asked by certain of the jurors, and were so answered by the trial justice as to be entirely free from objection or exception by either party to the action; and the court charged the certain requests substantially as requested by both counsel. Under all of the circumstances, therefore, we do not think that the conclusion reached below should be disturbed on appeal. Judgment and order appealed from affirmed, with costs.
Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. All concur.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 1 case
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Most recent
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.