Hermann v. Van Buren

New York Court of Common Pleas

Hermann v. Van Buren

31 N.Y.S. 825, 10 Misc. 753, 64 N.Y. St. Rep. 631

DecidedJanuary 7, 1895

StatusPublished

This text of 31 N.Y.S. 825 (Hermann v. Van Buren) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Common Pleas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Hermann v. Van Buren, 31 N.Y.S. 825, 10 Misc. 753, 64 N.Y. St. Rep. 631 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1895).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

A certain paper was admitted in evidence against the objection and exception of the defendant (appellant), but is not included in the justice’s return. A motion by the appellant for leave to amend the return by supplying this paper has been denied because not made until after this court had intimated, upon the argument, its-decision upon the questions presented by the return as filed. Warren v. Campbell (Com. Pl. N. Y.) 14 N. Y. Supp. 165. The exception is-therefore ineffectual, as, in the absence of the paper, it cannot be determined that it was improperly admitted. The appellant has consequently failed to show error of law, and only a question of fact remains to be passed upon; and, after a review of the evidence, we are confirmed in our opinion, formed and intimated upon the argument, that the facts would not warrant a reversal of the justice’s decision. Judgment affirmed, with costs,.

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

PER CURIAM.

A certain paper was admitted in evidence against the objection and exception of the defendant (appellant), but is not included in the justice’s return. A motion by the appellant for leave to amend the return by supplying this paper has been denied because not made until after this court had intimated, upon the argument, its-decision upon the questions presented by the return as filed. Warren v. Campbell (Com. Pl. N. Y.) 14 N. Y. Supp. 165. The exception is-therefore ineffectual, as, in the absence of the paper, it cannot be determined that it was improperly admitted. The appellant has consequently failed to show error of law, and only a question of fact remains to be passed upon; and, after a review of the evidence, we are confirmed in our opinion, formed and intimated upon the argument, that the facts would not warrant a reversal of the justice’s decision. Judgment affirmed, with costs,.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

31 N.Y.S. 825, 10 Misc. 753, 64 N.Y. St. Rep. 631, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hermann-v-van-buren-nyctcompl-1895.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack