Legal Opinion

Cantoni v. Forster

The Superior Court of New York City

Decided May 6, 1895Published

Appeal from an order, denying a motion for an order settling issues for trial by jury.

1Per curiam

The order should be affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements, upon the opinion filed below.

The action is of purely equitable cognizance, and the framing of issues therein entirely matter of discretion. The defendant is not entitled to a jury trial, either by constitutional considerations,, or those flowing from express provisions of law, and no right is violated by the denial thereof. Colie v. Tifft, 47 N. Y. 119 ; Colman v. Dixon, 50 id. 572 ; Powell v. Waldron, 89 id. 328; Wright v. Nostrand, 94 id. 31; Carroll v. Deimal, 95 id. 252 ; Acker v. Leland, 109 id. 5; 14 St. Rep. 23; Randall v.…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Lynch v. Metropolitan Elevated Railway Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1891
  2. Shepard v. Manhattan Railway Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1892
  3. Colie v. . TifftNew York Court of Appeals · 1871
  4. Church v. KelseySupreme Court of the United States · 1887
  5. Randall v. . RandallNew York Court of Appeals · 1889

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

Powered by the Exa API