Euler v. Kappelmann

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Euler v. Kappelmann

83 N.Y.S. 1105

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Euler v. Kappelmann. Read the opinion of the Court — 70 N.Y.S. 1139 →

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided July 24, 1903·Published

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.

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

Pincite

83 N.Y.S. 1105 (Euler v. Kappelmann) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related