Lyman v. Perlmutter
This text of 2 Liquor Tax Rep. 255 (Lyman v. Perlmutter) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
We have been addressed by an argument which asks us to overrule the decisions of the Supreme Court in the first and fourth Departments. (Lyman v. Rochester Title Ins. Co., 37 App. Div. 234; Lyman v. Brucker, 26 Misc. 594; affirmed on appeal, 42 App. Div. 624; Lyman v. Shenandoah Social Club), 39 App. Div. 459.) The argument, of the learned counsel for the appellant in support of his contention is forcible and able, but all of the views therein taken seem to have been met and answered by the decisions already rendered; and if we were doubtful of the correctness of such answer, its overthrow, if it be overthrown, must properly come from the court of last resort.
The evidence in the case is conflicting, and that adopted by the referee is not only contradicted, but in many respects contradictory. Nevertheless, there was clearly sufficient for him to-render the judgment appealed from, and this court is powerless to interfere. (Baird v. Mayor of New York, 96 N. Y. 567.)
The judgment should therefore be affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2 Liquor Tax Rep. 255, 62 N.Y.S. 866, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lyman-v-perlmutter-nyappdiv-1900.