Geoghegan v. Atlas Steamship Co.
New York Court of Common Pleas
Motion for reargument. Denied.
1Opinion of the CourtPryor, J.
The moving papers fail to show that any question presented by counsel and decisive of the case has been overlooked by the court. Rule 16. The complaint rather is that points are presented by the court which were overlooked by counsel. It is true that, through no neglect or inadvertence of counsel, however, attention was not directed to Gabrielson v. Waydell, 135 N. Y. 1, 31 N. E. 969, and Barrett v. Palmer, 135 N. Y. 336, 31 N. E. 1017; but the adjudication in neither of those cases is inconsistent with our decision. Barrett v. Palmer is altogether beside the question in controversy, and the…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Throop v. Hatch Lithographic Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1891
- Gabrielson v. . WaydellNew York Court of Appeals · 1892
- Barrett v. . PalmerNew York Court of Appeals · 1892
3Cited by1 opinion
- Central Park Baptist Church v. PattersonNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1895