Elishewitz v. Lipshitz

150 N.Y.S. 624
CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York
DecidedDecember 24, 1914
StatusPublished

This text of 150 N.Y.S. 624 (Elishewitz v. Lipshitz) 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
Elishewitz v. Lipshitz, 150 N.Y.S. 624 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1914).

Opinion

BIJUR, J.

Both sides had moved for a direction of a verdict. Plaintiff’s attorney then asked to go to the jury, but his request was refused.

The learned judge below seems to have been of opinion that, after both sides had moved for a direction, neither might withdraw the motion and resume his right to have the issues of fact submitted to the jury. This, however, both as a general proposition and as applied to the situation developed in the case at bar, is erroneous. Charles H. Brown Paint Co. v. Charles J. Reinhardt, 210 N. Y. 162, 163, 104 N. E. 124.

Judgment reversed, and new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide the event. All concur.

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

Related

Charles H. Brown Paint Co. v. Reinhardt
104 N.E. 124 (New York Court of Appeals, 1914)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
150 N.Y.S. 624, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/elishewitz-v-lipshitz-nyappterm-1914.