Pfohl v. Wipperman
This text of 310 N.E.2d 546 (Pfohl v. Wipperman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Order affirmed, with costs to defendants-respondents, in the following memorandum: Our court has jurisdiction to entertain this appeal. We conclude, however, that there are presented only questions of fact as to the weight of the evidence and no question of law. Accordingly, the order of the Appellate Division is outside our power of review. (Armstrong v. Campbell, 30 N Y 2d 704; Cameron v. Permakoff, 28 N Y 2d 938; Indiere v. Strickroth, 28 N Y 2d 513; Musumeci v. Pillsbury Mills, 11 N Y 2d 948; Gutin v. Mascali & Sons, 11 N Y 2d 97; see Cohen and Karger, Powers of the New York Court of Appeals [rev. ed.], § 148, p. 588.)
Concur: Chief Judge Breitel and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Rabin and Stevens.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
310 N.E.2d 546, 34 N.Y.2d 597, 354 N.Y.S.2d 951, 1974 N.Y. LEXIS 1826, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pfohl-v-wipperman-ny-1974.