Timpano v. David Stevenson Brewing Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Timpano v. David Stevenson Brewing Co.

123 A.D. 903, 107 N.Y.S. 317

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

DecidedDecember 15, 1907

StatusPublished

This text of 123 A.D. 903 (Timpano v. David Stevenson Brewing Co.) 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

Timpano v. David Stevenson Brewing Co., 123 A.D. 903, 107 N.Y.S. 317 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1907).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam:

The claim upon which the judgment appealed from was rendered was clearly litigated between the parties in a prior action for the foreclosure of -a mortgage in the Supreme Court, in which suit the plaintiff herein was defendant. In his answer in that case he set up as a counterclaim the same claim upon which the present suit jvas brought, and the matter was there litigated to a conclusion. The plaintiff herein is bound by that decree. It follows that the .judgment must be reversed and a new trial granted, costs to abide the event. Woodward, Jenks, Hooker and Miller, JJ., concurred; Hirschberg, P. J., not voting. Judgment of the Municipal .Court reversed and new trial ordered, costs to abide the event.

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

Per Curiam:

The claim upon which the judgment appealed from was rendered was clearly litigated between the parties in a prior action for the foreclosure of -a mortgage in the Supreme Court, in which suit the plaintiff herein was defendant. In his answer in that case he set up as a counterclaim the same claim upon which the present suit jvas brought, and the matter was there litigated to a conclusion. The plaintiff herein is bound by that decree. It follows that the .judgment must be reversed and a new trial granted, costs to abide the event. Woodward, Jenks, Hooker and Miller, JJ., concurred; Hirschberg, P. J., not voting. Judgment of the Municipal .Court reversed and new trial ordered, costs to abide the event.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

123 A.D. 903, 107 N.Y.S. 317, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/timpano-v-david-stevenson-brewing-co-nyappdiv-1907.