From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Conroy v. Allen

Supreme Court, Appellate Term
Mar 1, 1898
23 Misc. 125 (N.Y. App. Term 1898)

Opinion

March, 1898.

William L. Stone, Jr., for appellant.

I. Newton Williams, for respondent.


The only question involved in this appeal is one of fact, and the rule is well established that this court will not disturb the conclusion of the trial justice upon such a question, unless it is manifest that it was against the weight of evidence. After a careful examination of the proofs, we are unable to find that such was the case here. The determination of the facts required the trial justice to pass upon the veracity of the witnesses. He had them before him and observed their demeanor on the witness stand and the manner in which they gave their testimony. These are matters which may be legitimately considered where such a question is to be determined, but, from the nature of the case, they are not susceptible of reproduction in the minutes of the trial. The appellate court is, therefore, seldom in a position to satisfactorily review a decision upon the facts where the determination of the case rests upon a question of credibility. We, therefore, feel constrained to affirm the judgment. Judgment affirmed, with costs.

GILDERSLEEVE and GIEGERICH, JJ., concur.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.


Summaries of

Conroy v. Allen

Supreme Court, Appellate Term
Mar 1, 1898
23 Misc. 125 (N.Y. App. Term 1898)
Case details for

Conroy v. Allen

Case Details

Full title:JOHN H. CONROY, Respondent, v . FRANK S. ALLEN, Appellant

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Term

Date published: Mar 1, 1898

Citations

23 Misc. 125 (N.Y. App. Term 1898)
50 N.Y.S. 610

Citing Cases

Kingston v. Berry

Upon hearing the evidence on the issue thus raised, the court found against the defendant and his just…