1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.Supp.
  4. 84 F.Supp.
  5. 84 F.Supp. 296 (1949)
 

HELSEL v. PENNSYLVANIA R. CO.

Civ. No. 8746.

84 F.Supp. 296 (1949)

HELSEL v. PENNSYLVANIA R. CO.

United States District Court E. D. New York.

June 14, 1949.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Morris A. Wainger, New York City (William Paul Allen and Morris A. Wainger, New York City, of counsel), for plaintiff.

Conboy, Hewitt, O'Brien & Boardman, New York City (Frederick vP. Bryan, New York City, of counsel), for defendant.

BYERS, District Judge.

This is a motion for a new trial because of alleged error in the charge, and in the alternative for the reason that the verdict is excessive.

The first point turns upon the use of the expression "He (the engineer) had to be right about that (receiving a `go-ahead' signal from the plaintiff brakeman) and if he wasn't right about it then the railroad was negligent."

This somewhat colloquial form of expression lends itself perhaps...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases