Sperry v. Hillman

New York Court of Common Pleas

Sperry v. Hillman

13 N.Y.S. 271, 36 N.Y. St. Rep. 52, 1891 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1064

CourtNew York Court of Common Pleas

DecidedFebruary 2, 1891

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 13 N.Y.S. 271 (Sperry v. Hillman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Common Pleas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Sperry v. Hillman, 13 N.Y.S. 271, 36 N.Y. St. Rep. 52, 1891 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1064 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1891).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The plaintiff’s appeal should be dismissed. By giving the stipulation and entering the judgment for the amount to which it was reduced by the general term, he waived the right of appeal to this court. A party cannot avail himself of such parts of a judgment as are favorable to him, and appeal from those parts which are not. Grunberg v. Blumenlahl, 66 How. Pr. 62; Alexander v. Alexander, 104 N. Y. 643, 10 N. E. Rep. 37; Harris v. Taylor, 20 Wkly. Dig. 379; Canary v. Knowles, 41 Hun, 542. Defendants’ right of appeal to the general term of this court from the judgment entered, so far as it affirms, as reduced, the former judgment, is beyond ques[272]*272tian. The plaintiff’s appeal is dismissed, with costs, and we direct that the defendants’ appeal be argued at the general term of this court to be held in March next.

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

Per Curiam.

The plaintiff’s appeal should be dismissed. By giving the stipulation and entering the judgment for the amount to which it was reduced by the general term, he waived the right of appeal to this court. A party cannot avail himself of such parts of a judgment as are favorable to him, and appeal from those parts which are not. Grunberg v. Blumenlahl, 66 How. Pr. 62; Alexander v. Alexander, 104 N. Y. 643, 10 N. E. Rep. 37; Harris v. Taylor, 20 Wkly. Dig. 379; Canary v. Knowles, 41 Hun, 542. Defendants’ right of appeal to the general term of this court from the judgment entered, so far as it affirms, as reduced, the former judgment, is beyond ques[272]*272tian. The plaintiff’s appeal is dismissed, with costs, and we direct that the defendants’ appeal be argued at the general term of this court to be held in March next.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

13 N.Y.S. 271, 36 N.Y. St. Rep. 52, 1891 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1064, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sperry-v-hillman-nyctcompl-1891.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack