56 N.Y. 124, Coughtry v. Globe Woolen Co.

Citation:56 N.Y. 124
Party Name:WILLIAM W. COUGHTRY, Administrator, etc., Appellant, v. THE GLOBE WOOLEN COMPANY, Respondent.
Case Date:March 24, 1874
Court:New York Court of Appeals
 
FREE EXCERPT

Page 124

56 N.Y. 124

WILLIAM W. COUGHTRY, Administrator, etc., Appellant,

v.

THE GLOBE WOOLEN COMPANY, Respondent.

New York Court of Appeal

March 24, 1874

Argued Feb. 9, 1874.

COUNSEL

Amasa J. Parker for the appellant. The court erred in nonsuiting plaintiff. (Maloy v. N.Y. C. R. R. Co., 40 How., 274; 58 Barb., 182;

Page 125

Clare v. Nat. City Bk., 1 Sweeney, 539; Nolton v. West. R. R. Corp., 15 N.Y. 444; Winterbottom v. Wright, 10 M. & W., 109; Losee v. Clute, 51 N.Y. 494; Erdley v. Haggerty, 20 Penn., 387; Connolly v. Poillon, 41 Barb., 366; Ryan v. Fowler, 24 N.Y. 410; Patterson v. Wallace, 28 E. C. L., 50.) When there is any evidence tending to show negligence, it is erroneous to nonsuit. (Wolfkiel v. Sixth Ave. R. R. Co., 38 N.Y. 49; Nichols v. Sixth Ave. R. R. Co., Id., 131; Colt v. Sixth Ave. R. R. Co., 49 Id., 671; Silliman v. Lewis, Id., 379; Warden v. Austin, 51 Barb., 9.) Whether the scaffold was properly nailed was one of the issues on the trial. (Patchin v. Astor Ins. Co., 13 N.Y. 269; Newton v. Harris, 6 Id., 345; Starke v. People, 5 Den., 108; Hagan v. Cregan, 6 Robt., 138; Frank v. Manny, 2 Daly, 92.) As the deceased was not in defendant's employ, it was liable for the negligence of one of its servants. (Young v. N.Y. C. R. R. Co., 30 Barb., 229; Schuler v. H. R. R. R. Co., 38 Id., 653; McMullen v. Hoyt, 2 Daly, 271; Boniface v. Relyea, 6 Robt., 397, § 5; 5 Abb. [ N. S.], 259.) Defendant would have been liable, even if the deceased had been in its employ. (Laning v. N.Y. C. R. R. Co., 49 N.Y. 521; Connolly v. Patten, 41 Barb., 366; Ryan v. Fowler, 24 N.Y. 410; Kegan v. West. R. R. Corp., 4 Seld., 175.)

John D. Kernan for the respondent. Defendant did not owe plaintiff's intestate any duty in reference to the scaffold. (Winchester v. Thomas, 2 Seld., 397, 408; Loop v. Litchfield, 42 N.Y. 351, 358; Losee v. Clute, 51 Id., 494; Longmeid v. Holliday, 6 E. L. and Eq., 562; Barrett v. S. M. Co, 1 Sweeney, 545; Winterbottom v. Wright, 10 M. & W., 109; Mayor, etc., v. Cunliff, 2 Coms., 165, 170, 174, 180, 181; S. & R. on Neg., § 54.) An action for negligence can only be maintained by those who are contracting parties, or where the injury has been caused by the disregard or neglect of some public duty owed to the party injured. (Cook v. Prest., etc., 1 Hilt., 438; affirmed in principle, 42 N.Y. 350.) The

Page 126

nonsuit was proper, because there was not sufficient...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP