Legal Opinion

Kennedy v. Dzengielowski

New York County Courts

Decided March 23, 1928PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHazard, J.

I will consider the points raised by the moving party in the order in which they appear in his brief. The first is, “ That the plaintiff has not sustained the burden which the law places upon him.” The principal argument advanced is that, according to some evidence alleged to have been taken before the Industrial Board, plaintiff’s testimony was perhaps in some respects different from that upon this trial. This is not a motion for a new trial upon the ground of newly-discovered evidence, and the evidence taken before the Industrial Board was not before *636the jury in that case, and I think…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Feldstein v. Buick Motor Co.Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1921
  2. Weinreb v. Harlem Bakery & Lunch Room, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1923
  3. Claim of Koch v. Lehigh Valley RailroadAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1926
  4. Keigher v. General Electric Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1916
  5. Semmen v. Butterick Publishing Co.Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1917

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. City of Highland Park v. Grant-Mackenzie Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1962
  2. Sprague v. SpencerNew York Supreme Court · 1939

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

Powered by the Exa API