Hickey v. N.Y., N. H. & H. R. Co.

• Decision Date: 06 January 1911
• Citation: Hickey v. N.Y., N. H. & H. R. Co., 78 A. 655, 83 Conn. 713 (Conn. 1911)
• Court: Connecticut Supreme Court
• Parties: HICKEY v. NEW YORK, N. H. & H. R. CO.

78 A. 655

83 Conn. 713

HICKEY

v. NEW YORK, N. H. & H. R. CO.

Supreme Court of Errors of Connecticut.

Jan. 6, 1911.

Appeal from Superior Court, New Haven County; Milton A. Shumway, Judge.

Action by Martin Hickey against the New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad Company. A verdict was directed for defendant, and plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.

William E. Thorns, for appellant.

John P. Kellogg and Joseph P. Berry, for appellee.

THAYER, J. The evidence in this case is not before us. It appears from the record that the plaintiff requested the court to make a finding for the purpose of an appeal to review the question of the correctness of the court's action in directing a verdict for the defendant. The court made a finding which purports to give a summary of the evidence introduced by the plaintiff and the defendant. The plaintiff perfected his appeal claiming that it appears from this summary that the court erred in directing a verdict for the defendant. This method of bringing the question before this court is expeditious and economical and is proper when the summary of the evidence is agreed to by both parties. But unless such a summary is agreed to by the parties and approved by the court, the evidence and rulings should be made a part of the record in one of the ways described in Farrington v. Cheponis (decided at the present term) 78 Atl. 652. In such a case the appellant would be bound to furnish a transcript of all the evidence in the case for the court to certify and make a part of the record. In the present case the parties have treated the summary as a satisfactory statement of the evidence, and we therefore treat it as such.

It appears from the finding that there was evidence tending to show that the plaintiff's son was sliding down hill near his home and about 250 feet distant from the defendant's railroad track about five minutes before the train which was claimed to have caused his injuries passed by. He was found in an...