Mayer v. Heidelbach

24 Jones & S. 595
CourtThe Superior Court of New York City
DecidedFebruary 4, 1889
StatusPublished

This text of 24 Jones & S. 595 (Mayer v. Heidelbach) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering The Superior Court of New York City primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Mayer v. Heidelbach, 24 Jones & S. 595 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1889).

Opinion

The above case was twice tried. It was first tried before the court without a jury by consent of the parties, and resulted in a decision and judgment against plaintiffs. On the appeal to the General Term by the plaintiffs, the appeal book did not contain the evidence, but only the findings of fact and law. The General Term reversed the judgment and ordered a new trial (54 N. Y. Super. Ct. R., p. 438). On the new trial which was also had by consent before the court without a jury, a decision was made in plaintiffs’ favor, from the judgment on which the appeal was taken. The appeal book contained all of the evidence as well as the findings of fact and law. The findings of fact and law contained in the appeal book on the first appeal presented all the material facts disclosed by the evidence given on the new trial.

The court in affirming the judgment rendered for the plaintiffs on the new trial, held as set forth in the headnote.

[596]*596Sterne & Thompson, attorneys, and Simon Sterne and John K. Creevey, of counsel for appellants.

James G. Foley, attorney and of counsel for respondents.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
24 Jones & S. 595, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mayer-v-heidelbach-nysuperctnyc-1889.