Snelling v. Yetter

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Snelling v. Yetter

25 A.D. 596, 49 N.Y.S. 921

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedFebruary 15, 1898

DocketNo. 2

StatusPublished

This text of 25 A.D. 596 (Snelling v. Yetter) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Snelling v. Yetter, 25 A.D. 596, 49 N.Y.S. 921 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1898).

Pincite

Opinions

Barrett, J. :

As we have held upon the main appeal that the plaintiff took a. sufficient exception to the dismissal of the complaint to ivarrant the hearing and decision of the motion for a new trial upon the trial justice’s minutes, we think the order appealed from should be modified so as to permit the fact that such exception was taken to appear therein. The learned counsel for the plaintiff, in his application for a resettlement, asked more than he was entitled to, and specified grounds which were not taken. That, however, does not deprive him. of a resettlement as to the ground which actually was taken. . ■

: The order denying the motion for a resettlement should, therefore, be reversed and an order made resettling the original order so-as to read that the motion- therein referred was made upon the [597]*597plaintiffs exception to the dismissal of the complaint, without costs of this appeal.

Rumsey, Patterson and O’Brien, JJ., concurred; Van Brunt, P. J., dissented.

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

Barrett, J. :

As we have held upon the main appeal that the plaintiff took a. sufficient exception to the dismissal of the complaint to ivarrant the hearing and decision of the motion for a new trial upon the trial justice’s minutes, we think the order appealed from should be modified so as to permit the fact that such exception was taken to appear therein. The learned counsel for the plaintiff, in his application for a resettlement, asked more than he was entitled to, and specified grounds which were not taken. That, however, does not deprive him. of a resettlement as to the ground which actually was taken. . ■

: The order denying the motion for a resettlement should, therefore, be reversed and an order made resettling the original order so-as to read that the motion- therein referred was made upon the [597]*597plaintiffs exception to the dismissal of the complaint, without costs of this appeal.

Rumsey, Patterson and O’Brien, JJ., concurred; Van Brunt, P. J., dissented.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

25 A.D. 596, 49 N.Y.S. 921, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/snelling-v-yetter-nyappdiv-1898.