Prager v. Schafuss

51 Misc. 647, 99 N.Y.S. 840

This text of 51 Misc. 647 (Prager v. Schafuss) 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
Prager v. Schafuss, 51 Misc. 647, 99 N.Y.S. 840 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1906).

Opinion

Levehtbitt, J.

The only ground of appeal presented is that the verdict of the jury is against the weight of evidence. Not only does the record show that such is not the fact, but, even if it were, the defendant is not in a position to raise the question. By his omission to appeal from the order denying the motion for a new trial, he precludes us from weighing the evidence and confines us to a consideration of exceptions, of which the record is barren. Third Ave. R. R. Co. v. Ebling, 100 N. Y. 98; Mollineaux v. Clapp, 99 App. Div. 543; Zeisloft v. Blackburne Co., 45 Misc. Rep. 595.

Gildeesleeve and McCall, JJ., concur.

Judgment affirmed, with costs to respondent.

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

Related

Third Avenue R.R. Co. v. . Ebling
2 N.E. 878 (New York Court of Appeals, 1885)
Mollineaux v. Clapp
99 A.D. 543 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1904)
Zeisloft v. George V. Blackburne Co.
45 Misc. 595 (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 1904)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
51 Misc. 647, 99 N.Y.S. 840, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/prager-v-schafuss-nyappterm-1906.