O'Herlihy v. . Joline

New York Court of Appeals

O'Herlihy v. . Joline

98 N.E. 1110, 205 N.Y. 548, 1912 N.Y. LEXIS 1280

New York Court of Appeals·Decided April 2, 1912·Published

Opinion

Judgment reversed and new trial granted, costs to abide event; no opinion.

Concur: Cullen, Oh. J., Gray, Vann, Willard Bartlett and Collin, JJ.; Hiscook and Chase, JJ., dissent, on the ground that while plaintiff’s counsel was guilty of misconduct on the trial, which would have justified the Appellate Division in reversing the judgment, they doubt that any error of law was presented which gives this court jurisdiction to reverse.

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

Judgment reversed and new trial granted, costs to abide event; no opinion.

Concur: Cullen, Oh. J., Gray, Vann, Willard Bartlett and Collin, JJ.; Hiscook and Chase, JJ., dissent, on the ground that while plaintiff’s counsel was guilty of misconduct on the trial, which would have justified the Appellate Division in reversing the judgment, they doubt that any error of law was presented which gives this court jurisdiction to reverse.

O'Herlihy v. . Joline, 98 N.E. 1110, 205 N.Y. 548, 1912 N.Y. LEXIS 1280 (N.Y. 1912).

Pincite

98 N.E. 1110 (O'Herlihy v. . Joline) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.