Goldowitz v. Healey

City of New York Municipal Court

Goldowitz v. Healey

32 Misc. 758, 65 N.Y.S. 1133

DecidedJuly 15, 1900

StatusPublished

This text of 32 Misc. 758 (Goldowitz v. Healey) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering City of New York Municipal Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Goldowitz v. Healey, 32 Misc. 758, 65 N.Y.S. 1133 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1900).

Pincite

Opinion

Hascall, J.

The only plea urged upon us upon this appeal is consideration of exceptions taken to rulings upon questions propounded to a witness for plaintiff, and that we should therein find ground for reversal. Examination of the same shows no sufficient reason for disturbing the record below. The motion to dismiss the complaint was properly denied.

Judgment and order appealed from are affirmed, with costs.

Conlan and Schuchman, JJ., concur.

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs.

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

Hascall, J.

The only plea urged upon us upon this appeal is consideration of exceptions taken to rulings upon questions propounded to a witness for plaintiff, and that we should therein find ground for reversal. Examination of the same shows no sufficient reason for disturbing the record below. The motion to dismiss the complaint was properly denied.

Judgment and order appealed from are affirmed, with costs.

Conlan and Schuchman, JJ., concur.

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

32 Misc. 758, 65 N.Y.S. 1133, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/goldowitz-v-healey-nynyccityct-1900.