Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
Johanna Groth, Respondent, v. Thomas J. Washburn, Appellant, 1882 — 89 N.Y. 615 · caselaw · US
Torts · MBE-tested
Johanna Groth, Respondent, v. Thomas J. Washburn, Appellant
89 N.Y. 615·New York Court of Appeals·1882·NY
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
Johanna Groth, Respondent, v. Thomas J. Washburn, Appellant.
(Argued May 2, 1882;
decided May 30, 1882.)
This action was brought to recover damages alleged to have been occasioned by the negligence of defendant’s servant.
.Plaintiff, while crossing Centre street in the city of New York, was knocked down and run over by defendant’s carriage driven by his servant and employed in his business.
The court instructed the jury that plaintiff could not recover unless she “ was entirely free from negligence,” nor unless “ the accident was caused wholly by the negligence of defendant’s servant.” No exception was made to any portion of the charge, and no request was made for additional instructions. There was evidence showing careless and reckless conduct, or want of skill on the part of the driver. Held, that the verdict was not the subject of review here. (Hoyt v. Thompson, 19 N. Y. 207; Marshall v. Smith, 20 id. 251.)
Charles M. Earle for appellant.
L. E. Gilbert for respondent.
[MAJORITY — Danforth, J.,]
Danforth, J.,
reads for affirmance.
All concur, except Miller and Tract, JJ., absent.
Judgment affirmed.