From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Caspary v. Bardong

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 1, 1933
239 App. Div. 849 (N.Y. App. Div. 1933)

Opinion

May, 1933.

Present — Lazansky, P.J., Kapper, Carswell, Scudder and Tompkins, JJ.


Amended order denying defendants' motion for a new trial on the ground of newly-discovered evidence unanimously affirmed, with costs. The motion papers fail to show that any effort was made, prior to the trial, to ascertain where plaintiff was employed. The so-called newly-discovered evidence was available long before the trial and could have been obtained by the exercise of reasonable diligence.


Summaries of

Caspary v. Bardong

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 1, 1933
239 App. Div. 849 (N.Y. App. Div. 1933)
Case details for

Caspary v. Bardong

Case Details

Full title:THERESA CASPARY, by JOHN CASPARY, Her Guardian ad Litem, Respondent, v…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: May 1, 1933

Citations

239 App. Div. 849 (N.Y. App. Div. 1933)