This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

P's wife fell as she was helped by an employee of D as she left one of D's trains. P, her husband, sought recovery of damages for personal injuries to his wife, alleged to have been sustained by reason of the negligence of the D, through its employee, in assisting her to alight from a passenger train. During trial, D asked the wife if she was fond of playing bridge. P objected, wherein his counsel stated: “We object to that. I do not think it is material.” The objection was overruled. The jury found $2,500 in damages but also found that the wife failed to exercise ordinary care for her own safety. D got the judgment, and P appealed.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.