Miller v. Margulies

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Miller v. Margulies

104 N.Y.S. 673

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedMay 29, 1907

StatusPublished

This text of 104 N.Y.S. 673 (Miller v. Margulies) 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

Miller v. Margulies, 104 N.Y.S. 673 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1907).

Pincite

Opinion

SEABURY, J.

This case presents simply a question of fact. The plaintiff testified that he was to be paid as the work progressed, and the trial justice, who had an opportunity of observing the witnesses when they gave their testimony, disbelieved the testimony of the defendants and believed the testimony of the plaintiff. There is no inherent improbability in the plaintiff’s contention, and I can see no good reason why the opinion of the justices of this court should be substituted for that of the trial justice, when the issue presented is one of fact. The plaintiff actually did the work on the premises, which was shown to be at least of the value of $150; and I agree with the trial justice that he ought to be paid.

Judgment affirmed, with costs. All concur.

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

SEABURY, J.

This case presents simply a question of fact. The plaintiff testified that he was to be paid as the work progressed, and the trial justice, who had an opportunity of observing the witnesses when they gave their testimony, disbelieved the testimony of the defendants and believed the testimony of the plaintiff. There is no inherent improbability in the plaintiff’s contention, and I can see no good reason why the opinion of the justices of this court should be substituted for that of the trial justice, when the issue presented is one of fact. The plaintiff actually did the work on the premises, which was shown to be at least of the value of $150; and I agree with the trial justice that he ought to be paid.

Judgment affirmed, with costs. All concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

104 N.Y.S. 673, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/miller-v-margulies-nyappterm-1907.