Uptegrove v. Central Railroad

City of New York Municipal Court

Uptegrove v. Central Railroad

14 Misc. 460

City of New York Municipal Court·Decided November 15, 1895·Published

Opinion

McOabthy, J.

Both sides having moved for á direction of a verdict, left the question of law and fact to the trial, justice‘to determine.

We have examined the facts vei'y carefully and under Park v. Preston, 108 N. Y. 434, 487, think the judgment should be .affirmed, and, so ordered, with costs. See Jennings v. Grand Trunk Railway of Ganada, 127 N. Y. 449.

Fitzsimons, J., concurs:

judgment affirmed, with costs.

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

McOabthy, J.

Both sides having moved for á direction of a verdict, left the question of law and fact to the trial, justice‘to determine.

We have examined the facts vei'y carefully and under Park v. Preston, 108 N. Y. 434, 487, think the judgment should be .affirmed, and, so ordered, with costs. See Jennings v. Grand Trunk Railway of Ganada, 127 N. Y. 449.

Fitzsimons, J., concurs:

judgment affirmed, with costs.

Uptegrove v. Central Railroad, 14 Misc. 460 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1895).

Pincite

14 Misc. 460 (Uptegrove v. Central Railroad) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related