Superior Court of New York, 1890

Bohlen v. Metropolitan Elevated Railway Co.

Bohlen v. Metropolitan Elevated Railway Co.
Superior Court of New York · Decided March 4, 1890 · Dugro
9 N.Y.S. 424; 1890 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 199 (New York Supplement)

Counsel

Davies & Rapallo, for appellants. Sackett & Bennett, for respondent.

Bohlen v. Metropolitan Elevated Railway Co.

Opinion of the Court

Dugro, J.

The general term of this court recently held in Pappenheim v. Railway Co., 7 N. Y. Supp. 679, that findings of fact such as appear in the decision of this case are in irreconcilable conflict. Adopting this as a proper conclusion, it seems that it is impossible, from the record before us, to say *425which of the conflicting findings is correct. The error sought to be remedied by the order appealed from is therefore judicial, and cannot be corrected after judgment upon a motion made at a term other than that at which the judgment was rendered. Rockwell v. Carpenter, 25 Hun, 529; McLean v. Stewart, 14 Hun, 472; Gardiner v. Schwab, 34 Hun, 583; Freem. Judgm. §§ 70, 101. The order should be reversed.

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