Legal Opinion

Grier v. Hazard, Hazard & Co.

New York Court of Common Pleas

Decided June 1, 1891PublishedCited by 4 opinions

Appeal from city court, general term. Action by Matthew Grier and Ella D. George as executors of Charles H. George, against Hazard, Hazard & Co., a corporation, for work, labor, and materials, rendered by their testator to the defendant corporation. From judgment of the general term of the city court, affirming judgment on a verdict directed by the court, defendant appeals.

1Opinion of the CourtPryor, J.

Whatever errors may have been committed by the court below, it is impossible for this court, on the record before it, to reverse the judgment. After affirmance by the general term of the city court of a judgment on a verdict, we have no jurisdiction to review the facts. A motion for a new trial was made on the minutes, and denied; but no order denying the motion was entered, and the appellant relies only on an exception to the denial of the motion, but such an exception is utterly ineffectual to present any question for review. “On trials by jury, the only subjects for exception are rulings…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Dillon v. . CockcroftNew York Court of Appeals · 1882
  2. Boos v. . World Mutual Life Insurance Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1876

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Myers v. CohnNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1893
  2. Dearing v. PearsonNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1894
  3. Gundlin v. Hamburg-American Packet Co.New York Court of Common Pleas · 1894
  4. Hedges v. PolhemusNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1895

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

Powered by the Exa API