George Muryn, Plaintiff-appellant, v. New York Central Railroad Company, Defendant-appellee, 270 F.2d 645 (2d Cir. 1959)
Annotate this CaseDecided October 7, 1959
Daniel Galinson, New York City (Bromsen & Gammerman, New York City, on the brief), for plaintiff-appellant.
William L. Shumate, New York City (Gerald E. Dwyer, New York City, on the brief), for defendant-appellee.
Before LUMBARD, WATERMAN and FRIENDLY, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM.
The plaintiff, having consented to go to the jury on the factual issues, by his failure to move for a directed verdict, will not be heard now to challenge the verdict for the defendant on the ground of the insufficiency of the evidence. Jorgensen v. York Ice Machinery Corporation, 2 Cir., 1947, 160 F.2d 432.
In any event, we are of the opinion that a jury question was presented by the evidence regarding the operation by the defendant's employee of an electrical transporter, as a result of which a three foot iron pipe was thrown through the air striking and injuring the plaintiff.
Judgment affirmed in open court.
WATERMAN, Circuit Judge, concurs in the result.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
