Dubuc v. . Lazell, Dalley Co.
New York Court of Appeals
Appeal, by permission, from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered June 21, 1905, which affirmed an order of Special Term vacating and setting aside a judgment theretofore entered in the above-entitled action. This action was tried in the city of Hew York in May, 1904. At the conclusion of the charge to the jury, the justice presiding at the trial intimated to counsel that he desired to leave for his home in Hudson.
Read the full summary
Appeal, by permission, from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered June 21, 1905, which affirmed an order of Special Term vacating and setting aside a judgment theretofore entered in the above-entitled action. This action was tried in the city of Hew York in May, 1904. At the conclusion of the charge to the jury, the justice presiding at the trial intimated to counsel that he desired to leave for his home in Hudson. It was thereupon stipulated in open court by counsel for both parties that the verdict should be received by the clerk…
1Opinion of the CourtWerner, J.
Defendant’s counsel admits that he stipulated in open court that the verdict of the jury might be received by the clerk with the same force and effect as if the presiding justice iver'e present. He does not claim that this stipulation was entered into through mistake or inadvertence, nor has he ever asked to be relieved from it. Four days after the verdict was rendered he made a motion for a new trial without even alluding to any objection to the manner in which the verdict was received. That motion having been denied he took an appeal to the Appellate Division and in that court, although he…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Cancemi v. . the PeopleNew York Court of Appeals · 1858
- Matter of of N.Y., L. W.R.R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1885
- Cowenhoven v. . BallNew York Court of Appeals · 1890
- French v. MerrillAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1898
- Ingersoll v. Town of LansingNew York Supreme Court · 1889
3Cited by20 opinions
- Nishman v. De MarcoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1980
- Leora v. Minneapolis, St. Paul & Sault Ste. Marie Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1914
- People v. SilverAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1934
- Crunden-Martin Manufacturing Co. v. ChristyArizona Supreme Court · 1921
- Miller v. YoungMichigan Supreme Court · 1917
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.