Smith v. Drought
This text of 27 Misc. 810 (Smith v. Drought) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering City of New York Municipal Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
We find that no error, calling for reversal, was committed upon the trial. The question of interest on the plaintiff’s claim, after elimination therefrom of the item of $25 for sideboard, was agreed upon- as amounting to $40, so that the verdict seemed to be at the correct figure.
To all the material points raised by the appellant, upon his argument and brief, we think that the cases of Remington v. Palmer, 62 N. Y. 31, and Murdock v. Gilchrist, 52 N. Y. 242, are a complete answer.
.Judgment and order appealed‘ from affirmed, with costs and disbursements.
Fitzsimons, Oh. J., concurs.
Judgment 'and order affirmed, with costs.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
27 Misc. 810, 57 N.Y.S. 1148, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smith-v-drought-nynyccityct-1899.