Contracts · MBE-tested

John Schenck, Respondent, v. George Bengler et al., Appellants

105 N.Y. 630·New York Court of Appeals·1887·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

John Schenck, Respondent, v. George Bengler et al., Appellants. (Argued March 15, 1887 ; decided March 25, 1887.) This was a motion to open a default. The following is a mem. of the opinion: u Per Cu/riam. The default herein was regularly taken, and the counsel for defendants asks to have it opened and the case restored. We have looked into the return upon which the case would have to be argued in this court. It is very brief, and not an exception in it worthy of a moment’s consideration. The question as to the verdict being excessive cannot be reviewed here. Under these circumstances the motion to open the default should be denied, with $10 costs.” Isaac Keagleman, for motion. Matthew Marx opnosed. [MAJORITY — Per Curiam mem.] Per Curiam mem. for denial of motion. All concur. Motion denied.