Dornbush v. Yookel

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Dornbush v. Yookel

29 Misc. 743, 60 N.Y.S. 466

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedOctober 15, 1899

StatusPublished

This text of 29 Misc. 743 (Dornbush v. Yookel) 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

Dornbush v. Yookel, 29 Misc. 743, 60 N.Y.S. 466 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1899).

Pincite

Opinion

Freedman, P. J.

This action was brought to recover the sum of $147.75, as the value of extra labor done and materials furnished the defendant in excavating upon certain premises in the city.

Ho objections were made and no exceptions taken to the introduction of the testimony upon the trial. The case presents a conflict of evidence upon a question of fact, and as there is ample proof to sustain the judgment, and it not appearing that injustice has been done, the judgment must be affirmed.

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.

This action was brought to recover the sum of $147.75, as the value of extra labor done and materials furnished the defendant in excavating upon certain premises in the city.

Ho objections were made and no exceptions taken to the introduction of the testimony upon the trial. The case presents a conflict of evidence upon a question of fact, and as there is ample proof to sustain the judgment, and it not appearing that injustice has been done, the judgment must be affirmed.

MaoLean and Leventritt, JJ., concur.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

29 Misc. 743, 60 N.Y.S. 466, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dornbush-v-yookel-nyappterm-1899.