From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Brown v. Grossman

Supreme Court, Appellate Term
May 1, 1908
59 Misc. 153 (N.Y. App. Term 1908)

Opinion

May, 1908.

I. Gainsburg, for appellants.

J. McG. Goodale, for respondents.


The time limitation affecting motions for a new trial under section 1002 of the Code of Civil Procedure applies to motions "founded upon an allegation of error, in a finding of fact, or ruling upon the law, made by the judge upon the trial." Fleischmann v. Samuel, 18 A.D. 99.

The motion for the new trial in this case is specifically stated not to be based upon any error in a finding of fact (clearly not applicable to a jury trial) or ruling upon the law made by the judge upon the trial of the action, but is expressly limited to the grounds that the "verdict is contrary to the law as ruled by said trial judge."

In other words, a new trial is sought because the jury found a verdict in violation of the legal instructions of the court and the proofs submitted to them; and the case of Barrett v. Third Avenue R.R. Co., 45 N.Y. 628, seems to be authority for the correctness of defendants' practice.

The order appealed from must be affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements.

GILDERSLEEVE and GIEGERICH, JJ., concur.

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements.


Summaries of

Brown v. Grossman

Supreme Court, Appellate Term
May 1, 1908
59 Misc. 153 (N.Y. App. Term 1908)
Case details for

Brown v. Grossman

Case Details

Full title:LOUIS BROWN et al., Appellants, v . FANNIE GROSSMAN et al., Respondents

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Term

Date published: May 1, 1908

Citations

59 Misc. 153 (N.Y. App. Term 1908)
110 N.Y.S. 262