Rossin v. Petigor

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Rossin v. Petigor

88 N.Y.S. 350

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedMay 19, 1904

StatusPublished

This text of 88 N.Y.S. 350 (Rossin v. Petigor) 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

Rossin v. Petigor, 88 N.Y.S. 350 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1904).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This action was brought for alleged negligence in injuring a soda owned by the plaintiff, and alleged to have been removed from the place of business of one Solomon, to whom plaintiff had rented it. The- issues were sharply contested, and the testimony was very conflicting. Subsequent to the trial the defendant, upon affidavits setting forth a quantity of newly discovered evidence, moved for a new trial. This motion was bitterly contested and denied. ■An examination of the affidavits used upon this motion would indicate that the evidence had been discovered since the trial, that it could not have been obtained before trial by the exercise of due diligence, and that [351]*351it is of such a character as might with reasonable certainty be expected to change the' result. We are satisfied from a careful examination of the whole case that it will be in the interest of justice to order a new trial.

Judgment reversed. New trial ordered, with costs to the appellant to abide the event. -

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

PER CURIAM.

This action was brought for alleged negligence in injuring a soda owned by the plaintiff, and alleged to have been removed from the place of business of one Solomon, to whom plaintiff had rented it. The- issues were sharply contested, and the testimony was very conflicting. Subsequent to the trial the defendant, upon affidavits setting forth a quantity of newly discovered evidence, moved for a new trial. This motion was bitterly contested and denied. ■An examination of the affidavits used upon this motion would indicate that the evidence had been discovered since the trial, that it could not have been obtained before trial by the exercise of due diligence, and that [351]*351it is of such a character as might with reasonable certainty be expected to change the' result. We are satisfied from a careful examination of the whole case that it will be in the interest of justice to order a new trial.

Judgment reversed. New trial ordered, with costs to the appellant to abide the event. -

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

88 N.Y.S. 350, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rossin-v-petigor-nyappterm-1904.