From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Transcendent Light Co. v. Steitz

Supreme Court, Appellate Term
Jun 1, 1901
35 Misc. 305 (N.Y. App. Term 1901)

Opinion

June, 1901.

Herbert J. Hindes, for appellant.

Aaron Morris, for respondent.


Plaintiff asked leave to discontinue at the close of the testimony and such leave was refused. If exception had been taken to this ruling, judgment would have to be reversed. Rothenberg v. Filarsky, 30 Misc. 610. No exception was taken, and plaintiff's omission in this respect is fatal.

Present: SCOTT, P.J., BEACH and FITZGERALD, JJ.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.


Summaries of

Transcendent Light Co. v. Steitz

Supreme Court, Appellate Term
Jun 1, 1901
35 Misc. 305 (N.Y. App. Term 1901)
Case details for

Transcendent Light Co. v. Steitz

Case Details

Full title:THE TRANSCENDENT LIGHT Co., Appellant, v . THOMAS STEITZ, Respondent

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Term

Date published: Jun 1, 1901

Citations

35 Misc. 305 (N.Y. App. Term 1901)
71 N.Y.S. 947