Robinson v. Ficken

New York Court of Common Pleas

Robinson v. Ficken

10 Misc. 771

New York Court of Common Pleas·Decided July 1, 1894·Published

Opinion

Per Guriam.

It appears that the plaintiff’s exhibits Eos. 1, 2, 3 and 4, and defendant’s exhibits Eos. 1 and 2, are omitted from the return, which omission precludes any determination as to the matters litigated at this time.

It is, therefore, directed that the appeal be reheard at the Additional General Term of this court, to be held December 20, 1894, the return to be amended in the particulars noted meanwhile. Krakowski v. North. N. Y., etc., Assn., 54 N. Y. St. Repr. 119.

Present: Bisohoff and Giegerich, JJ.

Beargument ordered; papers to be amended.

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

Per Guriam.

It appears that the plaintiff’s exhibits Eos. 1, 2, 3 and 4, and defendant’s exhibits Eos. 1 and 2, are omitted from the return, which omission precludes any determination as to the matters litigated at this time.

It is, therefore, directed that the appeal be reheard at the Additional General Term of this court, to be held December 20, 1894, the return to be amended in the particulars noted meanwhile. Krakowski v. North. N. Y., etc., Assn., 54 N. Y. St. Repr. 119.

Present: Bisohoff and Giegerich, JJ.

Beargument ordered; papers to be amended.

Robinson v. Ficken, 10 Misc. 771 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1894).

Pincite

10 Misc. 771 (Robinson v. Ficken) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.