From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Lynes v. Hickey

New York Common Pleas — General Term
Aug 1, 1893
4 Misc. 522 (N.Y. Misc. 1893)

Opinion

August, 1893.

James P. Campbell, for defendant (appellant).

James F. Higgins, for plaintiff (respondent).


This action was brought to recover rent, under a written lease, of a portion of the premises known as No. 381 Sixth avenue, in this city. The defendant claims to have been evicted therefrom by the act of the plaintiff, but as there is a conflict of evidence in respect of the matters which are claimed to constitute the eviction, we will not interfere with the judgment of the justice, unless the evidence is of such a convincing character as to clearly indicate that there was a mistake on the part of the justice, or that he had been influenced by bias, passion, prejudice or corruption, or that he had manifestly neglected to deliberate upon the whole testimony. Schwartz v. Wechler, 2 Misc. 67; 23 Civ. Proc. Rep. 21; 20 N.Y.S. 861, and cases cited.

We are satisfied, after a most careful examination of the record, that the evidence in this cause does not lead to such a conclusion. The reversal of the judgment is sought solely upon the facts, and as we cannot discover any ground for disturbing the justice's determination thereof the judgment should be affirmed, with costs.

BISCHOFF, J., concurs.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.


Summaries of

Lynes v. Hickey

New York Common Pleas — General Term
Aug 1, 1893
4 Misc. 522 (N.Y. Misc. 1893)
Case details for

Lynes v. Hickey

Case Details

Full title:LYNES v . HICKEY

Court:New York Common Pleas — General Term

Date published: Aug 1, 1893

Citations

4 Misc. 522 (N.Y. Misc. 1893)
24 N.Y.S. 731

Citing Cases

White v. Balta

This evidence was, therefore, to be considered in the determination of the issues ( Crane v. Powell, 139 N.Y.…

Whedon v. Hogan

The evidence was conflicting as to whether this was an accommodation or a business note, but the trial…