Macaulay v. Anthony

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Macaulay v. Anthony

127 N.Y.S. 420

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedFebruary 9, 1911

StatusPublished

This text of 127 N.Y.S. 420 (Macaulay v. Anthony) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Macaulay v. Anthony, 127 N.Y.S. 420 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1911).

Pincite

Opinion

LEHMAN, J.

The plaintiff appeals from an order granting a new trial on the ground of newly discovered evidence. The justice sit- ■ ting at Special Term has carefully analyzed the affidavits presented in his opinion on the motion, and has determined that a new trial should be granted. Although I' should probably have reached the opposite conclusion, if the question were presented to me as an original motion-, I feel that it cannot be said with any certainty that the justice’s discretion has not been exercised soundly in granting a new trial. The order is, however, a distinct favor granted to the defendant, and should have been granted only upon reasonable terms.

It should therefore be modified, by imposing upon him the payment of all costs and disbursements to date as a condition to the granting of the motion, and, as modified, be affirmed, without costs to either party upon this appeal. All concur.

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

LEHMAN, J.

The plaintiff appeals from an order granting a new trial on the ground of newly discovered evidence. The justice sit- ■ ting at Special Term has carefully analyzed the affidavits presented in his opinion on the motion, and has determined that a new trial should be granted. Although I' should probably have reached the opposite conclusion, if the question were presented to me as an original motion-, I feel that it cannot be said with any certainty that the justice’s discretion has not been exercised soundly in granting a new trial. The order is, however, a distinct favor granted to the defendant, and should have been granted only upon reasonable terms.

It should therefore be modified, by imposing upon him the payment of all costs and disbursements to date as a condition to the granting of the motion, and, as modified, be affirmed, without costs to either party upon this appeal. All concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

127 N.Y.S. 420, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/macaulay-v-anthony-nyappterm-1911.