Hyperlawhypertext legal database Gray v. American Bank Note Co. 39 N.Y. St. Rep. 97

← Cases

Gray v. American Bank Note Co.

39 N.Y. St. Rep. 97 Court N.Y.C.P. Decision date 1891-06-01 English

Contents

Majority

p. 97
Charles E. Gray, Resp’t, v. The American Bank Note Company, App’lt.
(New York Common Pleas, General Term,
Filed June 1, 1891.)

Headnote

Appeal—Resettlement op case—Delay.
Where on the argument of an appeal it appeared that the only ground of error alleged was the insufficiency of the evidence to support the verdict upon which the judgment appealed from was entered, and the court announced that it was precluded from reviewing the evidence, as the case on appeal did not purport to contain it all, but withheld decision to give appellant an opportunity to resettle the case, if it is not done by the next term of the court, the appeal will be disposed of.
Appeal from a judgment of the general term of the city court
Isaac L. Miller, for app’lt; William R. Wilder, for resp’t.

—On the argument of this, appeal at the general term in January last, it appeared that the only ground of alleged error assigned by appellant was the insufficiency of the evidence to support the verdict upon which the judgment appealed from was entered, and the court thereupon announced that it was precluded from reviewing the evidence in as much as the case on

p. 98
appeal does not purport to contain all the evidence taken on the ' trail. Arnstein v. Haulenbeek, N. Y. Com. Pl. Dec., 1890 ; 11 N. Y. Supp., 701 ; 34 N. Y. State Rep., 297.

At the request of appellant’s counsel, however, decision of the * appeal was deferred so that he might have opportunity of causing the case to be resettled and the requisite certificate to be supplied and so enable us to dispose of this appeal on the merits. Since then j there has been sufficient time within which the necessary application could have been made to and determined by the court below, and as a settlement of the case has not been brought to our atten- ¡ tion and we have not been advised that an application for such resettlement is pending and undetermined, we feel justified in disposing of this appeal which must be as intimated on the argument. The judgment and order appealed from should be affirmed,, i with costs.

Judgment and order appealed from affirmed, with costs.

Allen, P. J., Bischoff and Pryor, JJ., concur. ;