Legal Opinion

Updike v. Abel

New York Supreme Court

Decided April 4, 1871PublishedCited by 1 opinion

THIS is an appeal from an order made by the judge before whom the action was tried, granting a new trial upon a case and exceptions. The motion was made, also,' upon the ground of surprise and newly discovered evidence. The action was for fraud charged to have been committed by the defendant, upon the plaintiff in the sale to the latter, of lands in the State of Michigan.

Read the full summary

THIS is an appeal from an order made by the judge before whom the action was tried, granting a new trial upon a case and exceptions. The motion was made, also,' upon the ground of surprise and newly discovered evidence. The action was for fraud charged to have been committed by the defendant, upon the plaintiff in the sale to the latter, of lands in the State of Michigan. The allegations of' fraud were., in substance, that the defendant represented that he had a good title, and the best kind of title to said lands. That said lands had been located some thirty years ago, by one “ Tift” Jerome,…

1Opinion of the Court

By the Court, Potter, J.

As it appeal’s from the opinion of the learned judge, the motion for a new trial was granted, not upon the ground of surprise or newly discovered evidence, but upon the error of the court in refusing to nonsuit on the trial. The learned judge was clearty right in not granting the order upon the first mentioned ground, and that point is not now before us. -This narrows the review in the case to the question whether the judge correctly or incorrectly refused to nonsuit, on the trial.

In the charge of the learned judge to the jury, but two points were presented to them.…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Hamilton v. GridleyNew York Supreme Court · 1868

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Hudson v. SwanNew York City Court · 1879

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API