Kelsey v. Sargent
This text of 1 Silv. Ct. App. 325 (Kelsey v. Sargent) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The judgment rendered at special term made a reference necessary, therefore it was not final, but interlocutory. Barker v. White, 58 N. Y. 204.
[326]*326An appeal, however, was taken to the general term, and upon exceptions the defendant also moved that court for a new trial under section 1001 of the Code. The judgment was affirmed and the motion for a new trial denied. One order embraced both decisions, and from the whole of that order the defendant appealed.
So far as the appeal affects the order denying a new trial, it was well taken (§ 190, subd. 2; Raynor v. Raynor, 94 N. Y. 248, 251), and as the motion to dismiss relates to the whole appeal, and not a part only, it should be denied, and as the plaintiff asks for too much, he should pay costs.
Motion denied, with $10 costs.
All concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
1 Silv. Ct. App. 325, 5 N.Y. St. Rep. 616, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kelsey-v-sargent-ny-1887.