From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cosselmon v. Dunfee

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Nov 25, 1902
172 N.Y. 507 (N.Y. 1902)

Summary

In Cosselmon v. Dunfee, 172 N.Y. 507, 65 N.E. 494, the question was asked, "Do you know whether they carry insurance for accidents to their employees?"

Summary of this case from Horsford v. Glass Co.

Opinion

Argued November 19, 1902

Decided November 25, 1902

Theodore E. Hancock for appellants.

F.D. Wright for respondent.


We affirm this judgment without opinion, but feel constrained to refer to an occurrence on the trial that has become too frequent in negligence cases.

Counsel for plaintiff asked a witness for defendants this question: "Do you know whether they carry insurance for accident to their employees?" This question was objected to as incompetent and objection sustained.

While the learned trial judge made a proper disposition of the matter, nevertheless the propounding of the question was calculated to convey an improper impression to the jury.

The inquiry into the matter of insurance is not material and the practice of asking a question that counsel must be assumed to know cannot be answered is highly reprehensible, and where the trial court or Appellate Division is satisfied that the verdict of the jury has been influenced thereby it should, for that reason, set aside the verdict.

The judgment and order should be affirmed, with costs.

PARKER, Ch. J., GRAY, BARTLETT, HAIGHT, MARTIN, VANN, and WERNER, JJ., concur.

Judgment and order affirmed.


Summaries of

Cosselmon v. Dunfee

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Nov 25, 1902
172 N.Y. 507 (N.Y. 1902)

In Cosselmon v. Dunfee, 172 N.Y. 507, 65 N.E. 494, the question was asked, "Do you know whether they carry insurance for accidents to their employees?"

Summary of this case from Horsford v. Glass Co.

In Cosselmon v. Dunfee (172 N.Y. 507) the plaintiff's counsel asked a witness if he knew whether the defendants had insurance against accident to their employees.

Summary of this case from Rodzborski v. American Sugar Refining Co.

In Cosselmon v. Dunfee (172 N.Y. 507) the court said: "While the learned trial justice made a proper disposition of the matter, nevertheless the propounding of the question was calculated to convey an improper impression to the jury.

Summary of this case from Steinacher v. Sayles-Zahn Co.

In Cosselmon v. Dunfee (172 N.Y. 507) counsel for the plaintiff asked a witness for defendants whether the latter carried insurance for their employees.

Summary of this case from Frahm v. Siegel-Cooper Co.

In Cosselmon v. Dunfee (172 N.Y. 507) it was held that the question by plaintiff's counsel in the trial of a negligence case, "Do you know whether they (meaning the defendants) carry insurance for accident to their employees?

Summary of this case from Rinklin v. Acker

In Cosselmon v. Dunfee (172 N.Y. 507), the court, while affirming a judgment for the plaintiff in a negligence case, took occasion to reprehend the practice of counsel in attempting to introduce incompetent evidence, saying (p. 508), "where the trial court or Appellate Division is satisfied that the verdict of the jury has been influenced thereby it should, for that reason, set aside the verdict."

Summary of this case from Connolly v. Brooklyn Heights R.R. Co.
Case details for

Cosselmon v. Dunfee

Case Details

Full title:EDWARD D. COSSELMON, Respondent, v . JOHN DUNFEE et al., Appellants

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Nov 25, 1902

Citations

172 N.Y. 507 (N.Y. 1902)
65 N.E. 494

Citing Cases

Nicholas v. Rosenthal

Clearly there was an attempt being made to get before the jury evidence which defendant's counsel knew to be…

Horsford v. Glass Co.

The injury was caused byplaintiff's negligence in adopting an unsafe way: 61 S.C. 468; 86 S.C. 69; 78 S.C.…