Oglesby v. Massachusetts Accident Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Oglesby v. Massachusetts Accident Co.

212 A.D. 886

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided February 15, 1925·Published

Opinion

The motion in this case is not properly brought before this court, for the reason that the trial court had already denied the motion for a new trial. Under the circumstances, we are powerless to entertain the motion. (Starbuck v. Smith, 173 App. Div. 954; Babad v. Colton Dental Association, 150 id. 561; Fifth Ave. Bank v. Forty-second St. R. R. Co., 6 id. 567; Griswold v. Dexter, 62 Barb. 648; Schram v. Werner, 81 Hun, 561; Civ. Prac. Act, § 550; Rules Civ. Prac. rule 220.) The motion for a new trial is, therefore, denied, .but without costs in this court. Kelly, P. J., Rich, Jaycox, Kelby and Young, JJ., concur.

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

The motion in this case is not properly brought before this court, for the reason that the trial court had already denied the motion for a new trial. Under the circumstances, we are powerless to entertain the motion. (Starbuck v. Smith, 173 App. Div. 954; Babad v. Colton Dental Association, 150 id. 561; Fifth Ave. Bank v. Forty-second St. R. R. Co., 6 id. 567; Griswold v. Dexter, 62 Barb. 648; Schram v. Werner, 81 Hun, 561; Civ. Prac. Act, § 550; Rules Civ. Prac. rule 220.) The motion for a new trial is, therefore, denied, .but without costs in this court. Kelly, P. J., Rich, Jaycox, Kelby and Young, JJ., concur.

Oglesby v. Massachusetts Accident Co., 212 A.D. 886 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1925).

Pincite

212 A.D. 886 (Oglesby v. Massachusetts Accident Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related