O'Reilly v. Stephens

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

O'Reilly v. Stephens

33 Misc. 754

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedNovember 15, 1900

StatusPublished

This text of 33 Misc. 754 (O'Reilly v. Stephens) 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

O'Reilly v. Stephens, 33 Misc. 754 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1900).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

We do not think that the circumstances adverted to by the defendant’s counsel, respecting the conduct of the trial, justify the criticism made by him. They certainly cannot be said to have operated to the prejudice of his client, in view of the fact that plaintiff’s evidence, respecting the defendant’s liability, is absolutely without contradiction.

Present: Beekman, P. J., Giegebioh and O’Gobman, JJ.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.

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

Per Curiam.

We do not think that the circumstances adverted to by the defendant’s counsel, respecting the conduct of the trial, justify the criticism made by him. They certainly cannot be said to have operated to the prejudice of his client, in view of the fact that plaintiff’s evidence, respecting the defendant’s liability, is absolutely without contradiction.

Present: Beekman, P. J., Giegebioh and O’Gobman, JJ.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

33 Misc. 754, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/oreilly-v-stephens-nyappterm-1900.