Legal Opinion

Heineman v. Van Stone

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Decided February 15, 1901PublishedCited by 1 opinion

Appeal from a judgment of the Municipal Court of the city of Wew York, tenth district, borough of Manhattan, in favor of the defendant. •

1Opinion of the CourtBlanchard, J.

When the case came up for trial the plaintiff was absent and the plaintiff’s attorney applied to the court for leave to discontinue. The court denied the motion and exception was duly taken. This was reversible error. The plaintiff had the right to discontinue at any time before the case was submitted, and a refusal on the part of the court to permit the discontinuance is a sufficient ground for the reversal of the judgment for the defendant. Goldberg v. Victor, 26 Misc. Rep. 728.

*203The judgment should be reversed and a new trial ordered, with costs to the appellant to abide the event.

Andrews,…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Goldberg v. VictorAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1899

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Nichols v. WilliamsAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1904

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

Powered by the Exa API