Goodwin v. Washburn

City of New York Municipal Court

Goodwin v. Washburn

32 Misc. 769, 66 N.Y.S. 473

DecidedOctober 15, 1900

StatusPublished

This text of 32 Misc. 769 (Goodwin v. Washburn) 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

Goodwin v. Washburn, 32 Misc. 769, 66 N.Y.S. 473 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1900).

Pincite

Opinion

Conlan, J.

The action is for labor and services, and for materials furnished; it is admitted that the work was done and the materials furnished, but the distinct defense is that the liability was not one for the defendants individually, but was against the executors of one Benjamin Richardson, deceased. This issue was distinctly presented to the jury upon all the evidence, and no exception was taken by the defendants to the whole or any part of the charge. With the province of the jury in determining disputed questions of fact the court on appeal is not inclined to interfere, unless it distinctly appears that the result was reached. through prejudice or undue influence or willful disregard of the evidence adduced on the trial, and as no such element appears by the record, we think the judgment appealed from should be affirmed, with costs.

Fitzsimons Ch. J., and Hascall, J., concur.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.

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

Conlan, J.

The action is for labor and services, and for materials furnished; it is admitted that the work was done and the materials furnished, but the distinct defense is that the liability was not one for the defendants individually, but was against the executors of one Benjamin Richardson, deceased. This issue was distinctly presented to the jury upon all the evidence, and no exception was taken by the defendants to the whole or any part of the charge. With the province of the jury in determining disputed questions of fact the court on appeal is not inclined to interfere, unless it distinctly appears that the result was reached. through prejudice or undue influence or willful disregard of the evidence adduced on the trial, and as no such element appears by the record, we think the judgment appealed from should be affirmed, with costs.

Fitzsimons Ch. J., and Hascall, J., concur.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

32 Misc. 769, 66 N.Y.S. 473, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/goodwin-v-washburn-nynyccityct-1900.