McLean v. Cole

New York Supreme Court

McLean v. Cole

20 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 300

DecidedFebruary 15, 1878

StatusPublished

This text of 20 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 300 (McLean v. Cole) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

McLean v. Cole, 20 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 300 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1878).

Pincite

Opinion

Barnard, P. J.:

This action was tried at the Putnam court by a jury. The complaint was in the usual form for the recovery of the possession of personal property, or for its value, if a return could not be had. The appeal is taken without a case having been settled according to the practice of the court. The appellant has printed and served a copy of the judgment roll simply. By this it appears that the verdict of the jury was a money verdict only, for $756. The ground of the appeal is, that the verdict should have been for a return of the property or for the value in case of its nondelivery. The appellant claims the right to review this alleged error, as it appears on the judgment roll without a case. This cannot be done ; no question, either of fact or law, arising upon the trial can be reviewed except upon a case made and settled according to .established practice. (Conolly v. Conolly, 16 How., 227; Hunt v. Bloomer, 13 N. Y., 341; Johnson v. Whitlock, 13 id., 345; Smith v. Grant, 15 id., 590.)

The appeal must be dismissed with ten dollars costs.

Present — Barnard, P. L, and Gilbert J; Dykman, J., not sitting.

Motion to dismiss appeal granted, with ten dollars costs.

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

Barnard, P. J.:

This action was tried at the Putnam court by a jury. The complaint was in the usual form for the recovery of the possession of personal property, or for its value, if a return could not be had. The appeal is taken without a case having been settled according to the practice of the court. The appellant has printed and served a copy of the judgment roll simply. By this it appears that the verdict of the jury was a money verdict only, for $756. The ground of the appeal is, that the verdict should have been for a return of the property or for the value in case of its nondelivery. The appellant claims the right to review this alleged error, as it appears on the judgment roll without a case. This cannot be done ; no question, either of fact or law, arising upon the trial can be reviewed except upon a case made and settled according to .established practice. (Conolly v. Conolly, 16 How., 227; Hunt v. Bloomer, 13 N. Y., 341; Johnson v. Whitlock, 13 id., 345; Smith v. Grant, 15 id., 590.)

The appeal must be dismissed with ten dollars costs.

Present — Barnard, P. L, and Gilbert J; Dykman, J., not sitting.

Motion to dismiss appeal granted, with ten dollars costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

20 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 300, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mclean-v-cole-nysupct-1878.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack