Solomon v. Meyers

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Solomon v. Meyers

24 Misc. 760, 53 N.Y.S. 901

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedOctober 15, 1898

StatusPublished

This text of 24 Misc. 760 (Solomon v. Meyers) 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

Solomon v. Meyers, 24 Misc. 760, 53 N.Y.S. 901 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1898).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The question of fact involved in this- case was a very close one, and was decided by the jury in favor of the plaintiff. It cannot be said that their verdict was against the weight of evidence, and it should not, therefore, be disturbed. The judge’s charge fairly presented the issue which was to be determined, and correctly instructed the jury upon the law of the case. We have examined the exceptions taken by the counsel for the defendants [761]*761■which are disclosed by the record, and are of the opinion that they do not disclose error -for which the judgment should be reversed. Judgment affirmed, with costs. .

Present: Beekman, P. J., Gildersleeve and Giegerich, JJ.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.

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

Per Curiam.

The question of fact involved in this- case was a very close one, and was decided by the jury in favor of the plaintiff. It cannot be said that their verdict was against the weight of evidence, and it should not, therefore, be disturbed. The judge’s charge fairly presented the issue which was to be determined, and correctly instructed the jury upon the law of the case. We have examined the exceptions taken by the counsel for the defendants [761]*761■which are disclosed by the record, and are of the opinion that they do not disclose error -for which the judgment should be reversed. Judgment affirmed, with costs. .

Present: Beekman, P. J., Gildersleeve and Giegerich, JJ.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

24 Misc. 760, 53 N.Y.S. 901, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/solomon-v-meyers-nyappterm-1898.