Wolff v. Kuhne

New York Supreme Court

Wolff v. Kuhne

28 N.Y.S. 1116, 59 N.Y. St. Rep. 885

DecidedMay 14, 1894

StatusPublished

This text of 28 N.Y.S. 1116 (Wolff v. Kuhne) 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

Wolff v. Kuhne, 28 N.Y.S. 1116, 59 N.Y. St. Rep. 885 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1894).

Pincite

Opinion

DYKMAN, J.

This is an appeal from a judgment entered upon the reportr of a referee. The action was brought to recover for labor and material furnished to the defendant by the plaintiff in the erection of a house and stable in Richmond county, and $150 for money lent. The referee found in favor of the plaintiff, and his report isj well sustained by the proof. The-testimony of the expert witness introduced by the defendant was quite uncertain and unsatisfactory, and the claim of the plaintiff was meritorious. A careful examination of the testimony leaves no doubt of the justice and legality of the r.eport, and it meets with our entire approval. The exceptions of the defendant disclose no error sufficient to require a reversal of the judg; ment, and it should be affirmed, with costs.

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

DYKMAN, J.

This is an appeal from a judgment entered upon the reportr of a referee. The action was brought to recover for labor and material furnished to the defendant by the plaintiff in the erection of a house and stable in Richmond county, and $150 for money lent. The referee found in favor of the plaintiff, and his report isj well sustained by the proof. The-testimony of the expert witness introduced by the defendant was quite uncertain and unsatisfactory, and the claim of the plaintiff was meritorious. A careful examination of the testimony leaves no doubt of the justice and legality of the r.eport, and it meets with our entire approval. The exceptions of the defendant disclose no error sufficient to require a reversal of the judg; ment, and it should be affirmed, with costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

28 N.Y.S. 1116, 59 N.Y. St. Rep. 885, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wolff-v-kuhne-nysupct-1894.