New York Supreme Court, 1890

Muller v. Rost

Muller v. Rost
New York Supreme Court · Decided October 24, 1890 · Brunt
11 N.Y.S. 615; 33 N.Y. St. Rep. 992; 1890 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2262 (New York Supplement)

Counsel

A. H. Berrick, (J. C. Julius Langbein, of counsel,) for appellant. Hugo R. Miller, for respondent.

Muller v. Rost

Opinion of the Court

Van Brunt, P. J.

There are circumstances disclosed by the papers herein which might very well lead the court to impose heavy conditions to the granting of a favor, but we think that perhaps the terms were rather severe. We think that the plaintiff was entitled to costs of motion, trial fee, term fee, and disbursements of the term, and to the stipulation ordered. The order appealed from should be modified to this extent, and, as modified, affirmed without costs. All concur.

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