N. Hudson Co. Ry. Co. v. May
| Court | United States State Supreme Court (New Jersey) |
| Writing for the Court | PARKER, J. |
| Citation | 5 A. 276,48 N.J.E. 401 |
| Decision Date | 19 July 1886 |
| Parties | NORTH HUDSON CO. RY. CO. v. MAY. |
48 N.J.E. 401
NORTH HUDSON CO. RY. CO.
v.
MAY.1
Supreme Court of New Jersey.
July 19, 1886.
Facts appear in opinion.
J. C. Besson and J. B. Vredenburgh, for plaintiff in error.
M. T. Newbold, for defendant in error.
PARKER, J. John May brought suit against the North Hudson County Railway Company for damages resulting from personal injuries received by him, caused by the alleged negligence of said company. The trial resulted in a verdict for the plaintiff, and judgment was entered thereon.
The first error assigned is that the court admitted the plaintiff below to be sworn and give evidence in the cause. It is contended that the plaintiff in error, a corporation aggregate, being only an artificial person, incapable of speaking and giving testimony, the opposing party cannot be permitted to testify because of the provision of the statute which provides that no party shall be sworn where the opposite party is prohibited by any legal disability from being sworn as a witness. It is true that a corporation is an artificial being, invisible and intangible, but it is a collection of individuals united in one body, acting and speaking through its officers and agents. Since the law which enacts that interest in the event shall not disqualify a witness, the officers and agents, as well as stockholders, are admitted to testify. So long as they are admitted as witnesses, the corporation cannot be said to be under legal disability. The court was right in admitting May as a witness.
The next error assigned is the refusal of the court to nonsuit. When the plaintiff in the suit rested, it appeared from the testimony that he was, at the time of the accident, riding on a horse car of the company, and was thrown off in consequence of the sudden starting of the car by
the driver. It also appears that the car inside was full of passengers; that the platform on which May was riding was crowded; and also that the rear platform was full. It also appeared that he stood on the front platform, holding on, when the violence of the sudden jerk, caused by the driver whipping his horses, threw him off the car. It further appeared that May was riding as a passenger on defendant's car in the only place he could find. The driver had received him as a passenger, and was bound to exercise care towards him, so as to carry him safely. When the case was rested on the part of May, it had been proved that the company was negligent in starting the car...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hoffman v. Palmer, No. 261.
...admitted in evidence." In Bloom v. Union Railway Company, 165 App.Div. 257, 150 N.Y.S. 779, and North Hudson Ry. Co. v. May, 48 N.J.L. 401, 5 A. 276, the courts reached the same result on similar In the Conner case, the conductor's report was (1) made pursuant to a rule imposing a duty to m......
-
Noble v. Farmers Union Trading Co., No. 8938
...Sellers v. Greer, 172 Ill. 549, 50 N.E. 246, 248, 40 L.R.A. 589. Compare: North Hudson County R. Co. v. May, 48 N.J.L. 401, 19 Vroom 401, 5 A. 276; Judd v. City Trust & Savings Bank, 133 Ohio St. 81, 12 N.E.2d 288; Stokes v. Continental Trust Co., 186 N.Y. 285, 78 N.E. 1090, 1093, 12 L.R.A.......
-
The Atchison v. Burks, 15,635
...6 L. R. A. 214; Powell v. Northern Pacific Railroad Co., 46 Minn. 249, 48 N.W. 907; North Hudson County Railway Co. v. May, 48 N.Y.L., 401, 5 A. 276; Insurance Company v. Mahone, 88 U.S. 152, 22 L.Ed. 593; Wabash R. R. Co. v. Farrell, 79 Ill.App. 508; The C., C., C. & St. L. Ry. Co. v. Ullo......
-
Ciardella v. Parker, No. A--463
...& A.1941); Cooper v. Endress Motors, Inc., 123 N.J.L. 290, 8 A.2d 382 (E. & A.1939); North Hudson County Railway Co. v. May, 48 N.J.L. 401, 5 A. 276 The cases of State v. Kwiatkowski, 85 N.J.L. 650, 85 A. 209 (E. & A.1912) and State v. Silver, 127 A. 545, 2 N.J.Misc. 479 (Sup.Ct.1924), affi......
-
Hoffman v. Palmer, No. 261.
...admitted in evidence." In Bloom v. Union Railway Company, 165 App.Div. 257, 150 N.Y.S. 779, and North Hudson Ry. Co. v. May, 48 N.J.L. 401, 5 A. 276, the courts reached the same result on similar In the Conner case, the conductor's report was (1) made pursuant to a rule imposing a duty to m......
-
Noble v. Farmers Union Trading Co., No. 8938
...Sellers v. Greer, 172 Ill. 549, 50 N.E. 246, 248, 40 L.R.A. 589. Compare: North Hudson County R. Co. v. May, 48 N.J.L. 401, 19 Vroom 401, 5 A. 276; Judd v. City Trust & Savings Bank, 133 Ohio St. 81, 12 N.E.2d 288; Stokes v. Continental Trust Co., 186 N.Y. 285, 78 N.E. 1090, 1093, 12 L.R.A.......
-
The Atchison v. Burks, 15,635
...6 L. R. A. 214; Powell v. Northern Pacific Railroad Co., 46 Minn. 249, 48 N.W. 907; North Hudson County Railway Co. v. May, 48 N.Y.L., 401, 5 A. 276; Insurance Company v. Mahone, 88 U.S. 152, 22 L.Ed. 593; Wabash R. R. Co. v. Farrell, 79 Ill.App. 508; The C., C., C. & St. L. Ry. Co. v. Ullo......
-
Ciardella v. Parker, No. A--463
...& A.1941); Cooper v. Endress Motors, Inc., 123 N.J.L. 290, 8 A.2d 382 (E. & A.1939); North Hudson County Railway Co. v. May, 48 N.J.L. 401, 5 A. 276 The cases of State v. Kwiatkowski, 85 N.J.L. 650, 85 A. 209 (E. & A.1912) and State v. Silver, 127 A. 545, 2 N.J.Misc. 479 (Sup.Ct.1924), affi......