General
Louis Tannenbaum, Respondent, v. Edwin E. Hoar, Appellant
26 A.D.2d 980·New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division·1966·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
Louis Tannenbaum, Respondent, v. Edwin E. Hoar, Appellant.
[MAJORITY — Reynolds, J.]
Reynolds, J.
Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Ulster County, which denied appellant’s motion to dismiss the complaint after the jury could not reach a verdict and granted a new trial. Direction of a new trial is mandatory where as here the first trial resulted in a hung jury (CPLR 4113, subd. [b] ). The instant order is not an appealable order under CPLR 5701 (subd. [a]). (Aesman v. Fox, 26 A D 2d 739; Covell v. H. R. H. Constr. Corp., 24 A D 2d 566, affd. 17 N Y 2d 709). Appeal dismissed, without costs. Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Aulisi and Staley, Jr., JJ., concur.