Demby v. New York City Railway Co.

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Demby v. New York City Railway Co.

108 N.Y.S. 656

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedJanuary 31, 1908

StatusPublished

This text of 108 N.Y.S. 656 (Demby v. New York City Railway Co.) 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

Demby v. New York City Railway Co., 108 N.Y.S. 656 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1908).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This action to recover a penalty for refusing to accept a transfer was tried before the decisions of the Appellate Division in Nicholson v. N. Y. City Ry. Co., 118 App. Div. 858, 103 N. Y. Supp. 695, and Kelly v. Same, 119 App. Div. 223, 104 N. Y. Supp. 561. The plaintiff obtained judgment, and the defendant appeals.

The testimony herein is of such a character that we think the interests of justice require a new trial should be had, illumined by the law as declared by the opinions handed down in the cases above cited. Other grounds urged by the appellant are worthy of discussion, but need not be now considered, in view of the conclusion reached.

The judgment should be reversed, and a new trial ordered, with costs to abide the event.

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

PER CURIAM.

This action to recover a penalty for refusing to accept a transfer was tried before the decisions of the Appellate Division in Nicholson v. N. Y. City Ry. Co., 118 App. Div. 858, 103 N. Y. Supp. 695, and Kelly v. Same, 119 App. Div. 223, 104 N. Y. Supp. 561. The plaintiff obtained judgment, and the defendant appeals.

The testimony herein is of such a character that we think the interests of justice require a new trial should be had, illumined by the law as declared by the opinions handed down in the cases above cited. Other grounds urged by the appellant are worthy of discussion, but need not be now considered, in view of the conclusion reached.

The judgment should be reversed, and a new trial ordered, with costs to abide the event.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

108 N.Y.S. 656, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/demby-v-new-york-city-railway-co-nyappterm-1908.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack