New York City Court, 1891

Rosenstook v. Hoggarty

Rosenstook v. Hoggarty
New York City Court · Decided January 26, 1891
13 N.Y.S. 228 (New York Supplement)

Counsel

George F. Alexander, for appellant. Martin Flanigan, for respondents.

Rosenstook v. Hoggarty

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam.

The books of account were properly admitted in evidence under the rule laid down in Bank v. Madden, 114 N. Y. 280, 284, 21 N. E. Rep. 408, and cases there. cited. We have, examined the other exceptions taken during the trial, and find no error. No exceptions were filed to the referee’s report uncler sections 993 arid 994 of the Code, and we are therefore only called upon t'a review the exceptions taken at the trial. Dainese v. Allen, 36 N. Y. Super. Ct. 98. Judgment affirmed, with costs.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.