Home/Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York/Transcendent Light Co. v. Steitz

Transcendent Light Co. v. Steitz

35 Misc. 305, 71 N.Y.S. 947
CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York
DecidedJune 15, 1901
StatusPublished

This text of 35 Misc. 305 (Transcendent Light Co. v. Steitz) 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.

Bluebook
Transcendent Light Co. v. Steitz, 35 Misc. 305, 71 N.Y.S. 947 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1901).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Plaintiff asked leave to discontinue at the close of the testimony and such leave was refused. If exception had been taken to this ruling, judgment would have to be reversed. Rothenberg v. Filarsky, 30 Misc. Rep. 610. Ho exception was taken, and plaintiff’s omission- in this respect is fatal.

Present: Scott, P. J., Beach and Fitzgerald, JJ.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.

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

Related

Rothenberg v. Filarsky
30 Misc. 610 (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 1900)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
35 Misc. 305, 71 N.Y.S. 947, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/transcendent-light-co-v-steitz-nyappterm-1901.