Citation Numbers: 61 A.D. 42, 69 N.Y.S. 1122
Judges: Laughliet, Williams
Filed Date: 4/15/1901
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 11/12/2024
(dissenting) :
I am of opinion that the effect of the court’s refusal to charge the jury as requested on that subject was to permit the jury to charge the defendant with negligence in not anticipating that the contractor would fail to guard the trench at night because it was not guarded in the daytime. The request contained a correct, material, relevant proposition of law, and it should have been charged.
There is no proof before us and it is not suggested by counsel that there was any error in the record as printed. Precedents, bad or good, like the opinions of experts, may be obtained for either side of most any proposition, but I know of no authority or precedent for this court indulging in the assumption that there has been a mistake made by the stenographer in taking or transcribing his minutes and upon that theory sustaining a judgment, which, according to the record as presented to us, should be reversed.
Judgment and order affirmed, with costs.