Arnheim v. Bowser

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Arnheim v. Bowser

244 A.D. 565, 280 N.Y.S. 54, 1935 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5873

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedMay 31, 1935

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 244 A.D. 565 (Arnheim v. Bowser) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Arnheim v. Bowser, 244 A.D. 565, 280 N.Y.S. 54, 1935 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5873 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1935).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

' We are of opinion that the newly-discovered evidence entitled the defendant to a retrial of the action, That evidence ia to the effect that the plaintiff received substantial interests in the enterprises in which he claimed to have made investments on behalf of the defendant. This newly-discovered evidence, if found to be credible, would establish not merely that the plaintiff’s testimony at the trial that he had no interest in these enterprises was false but would tend also to establish that the investments made in the two enterprises were for the plaintiff’s account,

The orders denying motions for a new trial should be reversed, the judgment vacated and a new trial ordered, with costs to the appellant to abide the event.

Present" Martin, P, J,, Murrell, McAvoy, O’Malley and Untermyer, JJ.

Orders reversed and judgment vacated and a new trial ordered, with costs to the appellant to abide the event.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Per Curiam.

' We are of opinion that the newly-discovered evidence entitled the defendant to a retrial of the action, That evidence ia to the effect that the plaintiff received substantial interests in the enterprises in which he claimed to have made investments on behalf of the defendant. This newly-discovered evidence, if found to be credible, would establish not merely that the plaintiff’s testimony at the trial that he had no interest in these enterprises was false but would tend also to establish that the investments made in the two enterprises were for the plaintiff’s account,

The orders denying motions for a new trial should be reversed, the judgment vacated and a new trial ordered, with costs to the appellant to abide the event.

Present" Martin, P, J,, Murrell, McAvoy, O’Malley and Untermyer, JJ.

Orders reversed and judgment vacated and a new trial ordered, with costs to the appellant to abide the event.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

244 A.D. 565, 280 N.Y.S. 54, 1935 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5873, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/arnheim-v-bowser-nyappdiv-1935.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack