Heineman v. Van Stone

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Heineman v. Van Stone

34 Misc. 202, 68 N.Y.S. 803

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedFebruary 15, 1901

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 34 Misc. 202 (Heineman v. Van Stone) 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

Heineman v. Van Stone, 34 Misc. 202, 68 N.Y.S. 803 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1901).

Pincite

Opinion

Blanchard, J.

When the case came up for trial the plaintiff was absent and the plaintiff’s attorney applied to the court for leave to discontinue. The court denied the motion and exception was duly taken. This was reversible error. The plaintiff had the right to discontinue at any time before the case was submitted, and a refusal on the part of the court to permit the discontinuance is a sufficient ground for the reversal of the judgment for the defendant. Goldberg v. Victor, 26 Misc. Rep. 728.

[203]*203The judgment should be reversed and a new trial ordered, with costs to the appellant to abide the event.

Andrews, P. J., and O’Gorman, J., concur.

Judgment reversed and new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide event.

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