Steinau v. Metropolitan Street Railway Co.

Majority

p. 126

Anna Steinau, Appellant, v. Metropolitan Street Railway Company, Respondent.

Headnote

Negligence—what must be stated in a bill of particular's of injuries received while boarding a street car.

Where the complaint in an action to recover damages for personal injuries sustained by the plaintiff, while trying to board one of the defendant’s cars, in consequence of the failure of the defendant’s agents to give her sufficient time for that purpose, alleges that she was thrown to the street and was seriously injured and was obliged to, and did, incur expense for medical and surgical attendance, appliances and medicines, the plaintiff will be required to serve a bill of particulars stating the expenses to which she was put for medical and surgical attendance, appliances and medicines, and the number of weeks during which she was confined to her bed as stated in the complaint; she should not, however, be required to state in her bill of particulars the nature, location and extent of her injuries,'nor the names^and addresses of the physicians who attended her and the number of visits they made, nor should she be required to state the number of the car and the direction in which it was moving, and the names and numbers respectively of the conductor and gripman in charge thereof, especially where she denies having such knowledge.

Appeal by the plaintiff, Anna Steinau, from an order of the Supreme Court, made at the New York Special Term and entered in the office of the clerk of the county of New York on the 19th day of March, 1901, granting the defendant’s motion for a bill of particulars. ■

B. Gerson Oppenheim, for the appellant.

John T. Little., for the. respondent.

This action was brought to recover for personal injuries, the complaint alleging that the plaintiff was injured by one of the cars of the defendant, the defendant’s agent not giving her sufficient time to board the car ; that the plaintiff was thrown to the street and seriously injured, and was obliged to and did incur great expense for medical and surgical attendance, appliances and medicines. The order required the plaintiff to give a bill of particulars specifying the number of the defendant’s car and the direction in

p. 127

which it was and had been moving, and the name and numbers oí the conductor and gripman in charge thereof.

We do not think the court below was justified in compelling the plaintiff to give the particulars above specified, as the plaintiff never got upon the car. It cannot be assumed that she knew the number of the car or the names or numbers of the conductor and gripman, and she expressly denies such knowledge. She was also required to specify in what respect she was seriously injured. We do not think the plaintiff should be compelled to specify by a bill of particulars the injury complained of, its nature, location and extent. We think, the court below correctly ordered an itemized statement of the expenses that the plaintiff was put to for medical and surgical appliances; but we think the particulars should be confined to such a statement, and that the plaintiff should not be compelled to furnish the defendant with the names and addresses of the physicians, the number of visits and the other particulars specified in the 4th subdivision of the defendant’s demand. As to the 5th subdivision, we think the court correctly required the plaintiff to state the number of weeks that she was confined to her bed as alleged in the 4th paragraph of the complaint.

The order should be modified by requiring the plaintiff to give the particulars of the expenses to which she was put for medical and surgical attendance, appliances and medicines, and the number of weeks during which she was confined to her bed as alleged in the 4th subdivision of the- complaint; and as modified affirmed, without costs.

Van Brunt, P. J., Patterson, O’Brien and McLaughlin, JJ., concurred.

Order modified as directed in opinion, and affirmed as modified, without costs.