Banton v. Torrey

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Banton v. Torrey

29 Misc. 742, 60 N.Y.S. 530

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedOctober 15, 1899

StatusPublished

This text of 29 Misc. 742 (Banton v. Torrey) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Banton v. Torrey, 29 Misc. 742, 60 N.Y.S. 530 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1899).

Pincite

Opinion

Freedman, P. J.

The judgment appealed from contains nothing to show that the defendant is subject to arrest and imprisonment, and without such adjudication he cannot be arrested and imprisoned. Consol. Act, § 1386. The appellant, therefore, is not prejudiced by the omission.

Moreover the case having apparently been tried upon oral pleadings to determine defendant’s indebtedness and the defendant having admitted his indebtedness to the plaintiff in the amount for which judgment was rendered against him, and no exception appearing in the ease which presents a question of law calling for reversal, the judgment represents substantial justice, and for that reason it should not be disturbed,

MaoLean and Leventritt, JJ., concur.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.

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

Freedman, P. J.

The judgment appealed from contains nothing to show that the defendant is subject to arrest and imprisonment, and without such adjudication he cannot be arrested and imprisoned. Consol. Act, § 1386. The appellant, therefore, is not prejudiced by the omission.

Moreover the case having apparently been tried upon oral pleadings to determine defendant’s indebtedness and the defendant having admitted his indebtedness to the plaintiff in the amount for which judgment was rendered against him, and no exception appearing in the ease which presents a question of law calling for reversal, the judgment represents substantial justice, and for that reason it should not be disturbed,

MaoLean and Leventritt, JJ., concur.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

29 Misc. 742, 60 N.Y.S. 530, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/banton-v-torrey-nyappterm-1899.