From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Shultes v. Sickles

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Oct 22, 1895
41 N.E. 574 (N.Y. 1895)

Summary

In Shultes v. Sickles (147 N.Y. 704) both parties requested the trial court to direct a verdict, and after a verdict had been directed for the defendant the plaintiff excepted to the ruling and requested the court "to submit the case to the jury upon all the questions of fact."

Summary of this case from Brown Paint Co. v. Reinhardt

Opinion

Argued October 9, 1895

Decided October 22, 1895

William Youmans for appellant.

George L. Stedman for respondent.



O'BRIEN, J., reads for affirmance of judgment, with costs.

All concur, except PECKHAM, J., taking no part.


Summaries of

Shultes v. Sickles

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Oct 22, 1895
41 N.E. 574 (N.Y. 1895)

In Shultes v. Sickles (147 N.Y. 704) both parties requested the trial court to direct a verdict, and after a verdict had been directed for the defendant the plaintiff excepted to the ruling and requested the court "to submit the case to the jury upon all the questions of fact."

Summary of this case from Brown Paint Co. v. Reinhardt
Case details for

Shultes v. Sickles

Case Details

Full title:ARTHUR W. SHULTES, Appellant, v . NICHOLAS A. SICKLES, Respondent

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Oct 22, 1895

Citations

41 N.E. 574 (N.Y. 1895)
41 N.E. 574
69 N.Y. St. Rptr. 712

Citing Cases

White v. Kenny

* * * It is well settled that where the defendant moves for a non-suit or rests his defense upon questions of…

United States v. One Chevrolet 1935 Sedan, Engine No. 4980926, Serial No. 12EAO35274

The exception to the refusal of the court to permit claimant's counsel to withdraw his motion for direction…