Streep v. McLoughlin
This text of 74 N.Y.S. 1147 (Streep v. McLoughlin) 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.
Opinion
The action was for wrongful discharge, and the main issue whether the hiring was by the year as claimed by the plaintiff, or by the week as urged by the defendants. The jury found for the plaintiff, and, as no motion for a dismissal of the complaint or direction of a verdict was made at the close of the plaintiff’s case, the defendants conceded the plaintiff’s right to have the issues submitted to the jury. Pollock v. Iron Works Co., 157 N. Y. 699, 700, 51 N. E. 979. Under the circumstances, we must regard the finding of the jury as conclusively settling the facts (Rowe v. Comley, 11 Daly, 317; Briscoe v. Litt, 19 Misc. Rep. 5, 8, 42 N. Y. Supp. 908; Bogan v. Wright, 22 Misc. Rep. 96, 48 N. Y. Supp. 546; Mahoney v. O’Neill, 29 Misc. Rep. 619, 620, 61 N. Y. Supp. 69); and, as there is no merit in the exceptions, the judgment and order appealed from must be affirmed, with costs. Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. All concur. See 72 N. Y. Supp. 1061.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
74 N.Y.S. 1147, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/streep-v-mcloughlin-nyappterm-1901.