Euler v. Kappelmann

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Euler v. Kappelmann

83 N.Y.S. 1105

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedJuly 24, 1903

StatusPublished

This text of 83 N.Y.S. 1105 (Euler v. Kappelmann) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Euler v. Kappelmann, 83 N.Y.S. 1105 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1903).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We think the judgment must be reversed, because of the rejection by the learned trial court of the evidence of the surveyor, Nostrand. Most of the excluded questions seem competent under the general rules of evidence. Many of them were admitted on the former trial over the appellant’s objection and exception, and the judgment and order then entered were unanimously affirmed. Euler v. Kappelmann, 60 App. Div. 631, 70 N. Y. Supp. 1139. The_ judgment should be reversed, and a new trial granted; costs to abide the event.

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

PER CURIAM.

We think the judgment must be reversed, because of the rejection by the learned trial court of the evidence of the surveyor, Nostrand. Most of the excluded questions seem competent under the general rules of evidence. Many of them were admitted on the former trial over the appellant’s objection and exception, and the judgment and order then entered were unanimously affirmed. Euler v. Kappelmann, 60 App. Div. 631, 70 N. Y. Supp. 1139. The_ judgment should be reversed, and a new trial granted; costs to abide the event.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

83 N.Y.S. 1105, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/euler-v-kappelmann-nyappdiv-1903.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack