Freudenheim v. London

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Freudenheim v. London

113 N.Y.S. 532

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedDecember 16, 1908

StatusPublished

This text of 113 N.Y.S. 532 (Freudenheim v. London) 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

Freudenheim v. London, 113 N.Y.S. 532 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1908).

Pincite

Opinion

HENDRICK, J.

Appeal from an order denying a motion for a new trial on the ground of newly discovered evidence. The evidence sought to be introduced was not newly discovered. Part of it is sought to be established by witnesses who were in court on the trial, and all of it is either in contradiction of testimony rendered on the trial on behalf of the plaintiff, or in impeachment of plaintiff’s witnesses. Evidence of such a character cannot be considered as newly discovered.

Order affirmed, with costs. All concur.

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

HENDRICK, J.

Appeal from an order denying a motion for a new trial on the ground of newly discovered evidence. The evidence sought to be introduced was not newly discovered. Part of it is sought to be established by witnesses who were in court on the trial, and all of it is either in contradiction of testimony rendered on the trial on behalf of the plaintiff, or in impeachment of plaintiff’s witnesses. Evidence of such a character cannot be considered as newly discovered.

Order affirmed, with costs. All concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

113 N.Y.S. 532, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/freudenheim-v-london-nyappterm-1908.