Legal Opinion

Ward v. Warren

New York Supreme Court

Decided November 15, 1878Published

Appeal from a judgment in favor of tbe plaintiff, entered upon tbe trial of tbis action at Special Term. The action was brought to restrain defendants from interfering with the plaintiff's enjoyment of a right to use an alloy between bis house and one belonging to defendants.

Read the full summary

Appeal from a judgment in favor of tbe plaintiff, entered upon tbe trial of tbis action at Special Term. The action was brought to restrain defendants from interfering with the plaintiff's enjoyment of a right to use an alloy between bis house and one belonging to defendants. Tbe justice before whom the action was tried, found among other things : That the plaintiff owned and had occupied for ten years last past certain premises in the city of Troy, New York, described in tbe complaint herein as tbe south half of lot No. 327, situated on the west side of Fourth street, between Broadway and…

1Opinion of the Court

Bockes, J. :

This being an equity case, and specific questions of fact having been submitted to the jury, under the order or direction of the court, as a substitute for feigned issues, and no motion for a new trial having been made on the judge’s minutes or otherwise, it is insisted on the part of the respondent that the defendants must be deemed to have acquiesced in the verdict of the jury. This question of practice seems to be settled in favor of the respondent. (Rule 33, 1858 ; Rule 40, 1874; Rule 31, 1878 ; Brown v. Clifford, 7 Lans., 46 : Hatch v. Peugnet, 64 Barb., 189 ; Hegeman v.…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Hatch v. PeugnetNew York Supreme Court · 1872
  2. Brown v. CliffordNew York Supreme Court · 1872

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

Powered by the Exa API