Klein v. East River Electric Light Co.

32 Misc. 774, 66 N.Y.S. 472
City of New York Municipal Court·Decided October 15, 1900·Published

Opinion

Hascall, J.

This appeal only brings up for review a question of law. Both sides, at the trial, moved for direction of a verdict in plaintiff’s favor. No motion for dismissal of complaint was made by defendants when plaintiff rested, as might properly have been done, so their point that plaintiff had not proven ownership [775]*775is not well taken, the right to so object having been waived by their silence. We think that, under the authorities cited (96 U. S. 51, 7 Wall. 82 and 31 Misc. Rep. 87), the ruling of the trial justice was correct.

Fitzsimons, Ch. J., concurs.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.

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

Klein v. East River Electric Light Co., 32 Misc. 774, 66 N.Y.S. 472 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1900).

32 Misc. 774 (Klein v. East River Electric Light Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Aurora City v. West
74 U.S. 82 (Supreme Court, 1869)
Cromwell v. County of Sac
96 U.S. 51 (Supreme Court, 1878)
German-American Bank v. Milliman
31 Misc. 87 (New York County Courts, 1900)