General
Henry Gawthrop et al., Appellants, v. James D. Leary, Respondent
89 N.Y. 622·New York Court of Appeals·1882·NY
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
Henry Gawthrop et al., Appellants, v. James D. Leary, Respondent.
(Submitted June 2, 1882 ;
decided June 13, 1882.)
The General Term reversed the judgment in this action upon the facts, holding that the evidence was insufficient to support the verdict, but did not order a new trial.
The court here say: “An examination of the record leads us to think that should have been done. (Goodman v. Conklin, 85 N. Y. 21.) It cannot be said that on a new trial a recovery would be impossible.”
Albert A. Abbott for appeHants.
John Berry for respondent.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam]
Per Curiam
opinion for modifying judgment by ordering a new trial.
All concur, except Tracy, J., absent.
Judgment accordingly.