Hoagland v. Miller
This text of 16 Abb. Pr. 103 (Hoagland v. Miller) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
This case comes irregularly before the general term. It is not an appeal from a judgment. PTo judgment has been entered in the case. On the trial at the circuit, before a justice of this court and a jury, the justice dismissed the complaint without submitting the case to the jury; and the counsel for the plaintiff excepted to such dismissal. The justice then ordered the exceptions to be heard in the first instance at the general term upon a case containing the exceptions, and directed an order to that effect to be entered in the minutes of the clerk.
I know of no authority for such a proceeding. I do not see how, regularly, the general term can render any judgment in this case, and think there should be a new trial ordered, costs to abide the event, upon the ground that there has been a mistrial. But if it should be deemed that we can regularly render a judgment in the.case, then I am of the opinion that the judgment should be that the complaint be dismissed, on the ground that judgment on the foreclosure-suit, to which Ford was a party, was and is a bar to this action.
This ground is sufficient, without examining any other.
Glebke, J.—I think the first objection correct.
Ingbajbam, J.—I concur.
Judgment reversed, on the ground of a mistrial.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
16 Abb. Pr. 103, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hoagland-v-miller-nysupct-1863.