Hyperlawhypertext legal database Hamburger v. Lipschitz 111 N.Y.S. 696

← Cases

Hamburger v. Lipschitz

111 N.Y.S. 696 Court N.Y. App. Term Decision date 1908-06-30 English

Contents

Majority

p. 696
HAMBURGER v. LIPSCHITZ et al.
(Supreme Court, Appellate Term.
June 30, 1908.)

Headnote

Coubts—Municipal Couets—Appeal—Motion fob New Tbial—Settled Case —Review.
An order of the Municipal Court of the city oí New 'York denying a new trial, not made on a settled case, as required by the rules of practice, cannot be reviewed by the Appellate Term.
Appeal from Municipal Court, Borough of Manhattan, Second District.
Action by Barnet Hamburger against Abraham S. Lipschitz and another. From a Municipal Court order denying defendants’ motion for a new trial, they appeal.
Dismissed.
Argued before GILDERSLEEVE, P. L, and MacLEAN and SEABURY, JJ.
Thomas P. Hall, for appellants.
Abraham I. Smolens, for respondent.

The court denied a motion for a new trial, made on the ground of newly discovered evidence. The motion was not made upon a case settled, as required by the rules of practice, and cannot, therefore, be reviewed by this court: Altmark v. Haimowitz, 55 Misc. Rep. 195 , 105 N. Y. Supp. 205 .

The appeal is dismissed, but, under the circumstances, without costs.

Cases cited