Wixson v. Sebring

New York Supreme Court

Wixson v. Sebring

56 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 610

DecidedJuly 15, 1888

StatusPublished

This text of 56 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 610 (Wixson v. Sebring) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Wixson v. Sebring, 56 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 610 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1888).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment affirmed, with costs.

Per Curiam:

“The opinion of the learned county judge very clearly shows that the appellant’s exceptions to the ruling of the Justice’s Court upon the admissibility of evidence were not well taken. In addition to the cases cited in the opinion, see Townsend v. Brundage (6 T. & C., 527; S. C., 4 Hun, 264.) The return shows that the case was submitted January 9, 1883, and that January 13, 1886, the justice rendered and entered judgment m his docket, but by mistake dated the entry January 14, 1886, and subsequently corrected the date. This was not error. The judgment is affirmed, with costs.”

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

Judgment affirmed, with costs.

Per Curiam:

“The opinion of the learned county judge very clearly shows that the appellant’s exceptions to the ruling of the Justice’s Court upon the admissibility of evidence were not well taken. In addition to the cases cited in the opinion, see Townsend v. Brundage (6 T. & C., 527; S. C., 4 Hun, 264.) The return shows that the case was submitted January 9, 1883, and that January 13, 1886, the justice rendered and entered judgment m his docket, but by mistake dated the entry January 14, 1886, and subsequently corrected the date. This was not error. The judgment is affirmed, with costs.”

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

56 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 610, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wixson-v-sebring-nysupct-1888.