Larkin v. Sullivan

New York Court of Common Pleas

Larkin v. Sullivan

29 N.Y.S. 1146, 9 Misc. 697, 61 N.Y. St. Rep. 112

DecidedAugust 1, 1894

StatusPublished

This text of 29 N.Y.S. 1146 (Larkin v. Sullivan) 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

Larkin v. Sullivan, 29 N.Y.S. 1146, 9 Misc. 697, 61 N.Y. St. Rep. 112 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1894).

Pincite

Opinion

BOOKSTAVER. J.

This action was brought to recover the sum of $75, which plaintiff claimed as a funeral benefit by Reason of the death of his wife, due to him by the defendant association because he was a financial me.aber of the district lodge. The case was tried by the justice, with a jury. The defense vyas two-fold—First, that the plaintiff was over forty years of age when he joined the lodge; and, second, that he was not a member in good standing at the time, because he was in arrears for dues for a period of three months prior to the death of his wife. The plaintiff’s testimony in the case was somewhat contradictory, but, on the other hand, the defendant’s testimony was vague and indefinite. There was enough evidence offered by the plaintiff to sustain his contention if believed by the jury, and their verdict shows they did believe him. Neither of the questions litigated before them was of a nature to induce sympathy on one side, or passion, prejudice, or hasty action on the other. We therefore do not think the verdict should be disturbed. As far as the record shows, no exceptions were taken during the course of the trial, and none were argued before us. The judgment should therefore be affirmed, with costs.

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

BOOKSTAVER. J.

This action was brought to recover the sum of $75, which plaintiff claimed as a funeral benefit by Reason of the death of his wife, due to him by the defendant association because he was a financial me.aber of the district lodge. The case was tried by the justice, with a jury. The defense vyas two-fold—First, that the plaintiff was over forty years of age when he joined the lodge; and, second, that he was not a member in good standing at the time, because he was in arrears for dues for a period of three months prior to the death of his wife. The plaintiff’s testimony in the case was somewhat contradictory, but, on the other hand, the defendant’s testimony was vague and indefinite. There was enough evidence offered by the plaintiff to sustain his contention if believed by the jury, and their verdict shows they did believe him. Neither of the questions litigated before them was of a nature to induce sympathy on one side, or passion, prejudice, or hasty action on the other. We therefore do not think the verdict should be disturbed. As far as the record shows, no exceptions were taken during the course of the trial, and none were argued before us. The judgment should therefore be affirmed, with costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

29 N.Y.S. 1146, 9 Misc. 697, 61 N.Y. St. Rep. 112, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/larkin-v-sullivan-nyctcompl-1894.