Tobin v. Manhattan Savings Institution

City of New York Municipal Court

Tobin v. Manhattan Savings Institution

23 N.Y.S. 1165, 52 N.Y. St. Rep. 942

DecidedMay 9, 1893

StatusPublished

This text of 23 N.Y.S. 1165 (Tobin v. Manhattan Savings Institution) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering City of New York Municipal Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Tobin v. Manhattan Savings Institution, 23 N.Y.S. 1165, 52 N.Y. St. Rep. 942 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1893).

Pincite

Opinion

NEWBURGER, J.

This is an appeal from a judgment rendered on the verdict of a jury, and from an order denying a motion for a new trial. This action was brought to recover $1,288.44, which plaintiff claims is a balance due him for deposits with the defendant. The answer of the defendant admitted that it had on deposit, belonging to the plaintiff, the sum of $325.44, but denied the balance, and claimed that such balance of $963 was drawn from the defendant by a check or draft. From an examination of the case, it appears that the only question raised throughout the trial was whether the defendant was guilty of want of reasonable care and diligence. The trial justice properly submitted that question to the jury. -There seem to have been no errors committed during the trial.

For these reasons the judgment must be affirmed.

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

NEWBURGER, J.

This is an appeal from a judgment rendered on the verdict of a jury, and from an order denying a motion for a new trial. This action was brought to recover $1,288.44, which plaintiff claims is a balance due him for deposits with the defendant. The answer of the defendant admitted that it had on deposit, belonging to the plaintiff, the sum of $325.44, but denied the balance, and claimed that such balance of $963 was drawn from the defendant by a check or draft. From an examination of the case, it appears that the only question raised throughout the trial was whether the defendant was guilty of want of reasonable care and diligence. The trial justice properly submitted that question to the jury. -There seem to have been no errors committed during the trial.

For these reasons the judgment must be affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

23 N.Y.S. 1165, 52 N.Y. St. Rep. 942, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tobin-v-manhattan-savings-institution-nynyccityct-1893.