Bohlen v. Metropolitan Elevated Railway Co.
This text of 9 N.Y.S. 424 (Bohlen v. Metropolitan Elevated Railway Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering The Superior Court of the City of New York and Buffalo primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The general term of this court recently held in Pappenheim v. Railway Co., 7 N. Y. Supp. 679, that findings of fact such as appear in the decision of this case are in irreconcilable conflict. Adopting this as a proper conclusion, it seems that it is impossible, from the record before us, to say [425]*425which of the conflicting findings is correct. The error sought to be remedied by the order appealed from is therefore judicial, and cannot be corrected after judgment upon a motion made at a term other than that at which the judgment was rendered. Rockwell v. Carpenter, 25 Hun, 529; McLean v. Stewart, 14 Hun, 472; Gardiner v. Schwab, 34 Hun, 583; Freem. Judgm. §§ 70, 101. The order should be reversed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
9 N.Y.S. 424, 1890 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 199, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bohlen-v-metropolitan-elevated-railway-co-superctny-1890.