Sprague v. Buell

256 A.D. 893, 9 N.Y.S.2d 87, 1939 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5272

This text of 256 A.D. 893 (Sprague v. Buell) 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
Sprague v. Buell, 256 A.D. 893, 9 N.Y.S.2d 87, 1939 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5272 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1939).

Opinion

Judgment and orders affirmed, with costs. Memorandum: The evidence presented questions of fact. The testimony offered by the defendant was neither incredible nor insufficient as a matter of law. Under these circumstances the finding of the jury is conclusive. (Meyers v. Hines, 199 App. Div. 594, 596.) We find no reversible error either in the submission of the case to the jury or in the denial of the motions for new trials on the ground of newly-discovered evidence. All concur. (The judgment is for defendant in an automobile negligence action. One order denies a motion for a new trial on the minutes, and the other order denies a motion for a new trial on the ground of newly-discovered evidence.) Present — Sears, P. J., Crosby, Cunningham, Taylor and Dowling, JJ.

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

Related

Meyers v. Hines
199 A.D. 594 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1922)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
256 A.D. 893, 9 N.Y.S.2d 87, 1939 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5272, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sprague-v-buell-nyappdiv-1939.