¶1The question involved is a novel one. Many considerations have been advanced for and against the right to a new trial in a case like the present, under the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure in force at the present time. The question can only be settled by the court of appeals, and it is important that it should be settled. As the learned judge who made the order appealed from rendered a well-considered opinion, I think it is best, especially in view of the rulings of the court of appeals in Godfrey v. Mosher, 66 N. Y. 250, Hiscock v. Harris, 80 N. Y. 402, and Conklin v. Snider, 104 N. Y. 641, 9 N. E. Rep. 880, as to the effect to be given' to the stipulation for judgment absolute filed by an appellant to that court, that the order should be affirmed. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements.
11 N.Y.S. 699
Roberts v. Baumgarten
The Superior Court of the City of New York and Buffalo
Decided December 1, 1890
The Superior Court of the City of New York and Buffalo · decided 1890-12-01
Ejectment by Edward Roberts against August Baumgarten and others. The cause was tried by the court, a jury having been waived, and judgment was given for plaintiff. Defendants appealed to the general term, where the-judgment was reversed, (51 R. Y. Super.
Relies on Godfrey v. . Moser · Hiscock v. . Harris · Conklin v. . Snider
Decided 1890-12-01