New York Supreme Court, 1891

Rose v. Hawley

New York Supreme Court · Decided July 2, 1891 · Dykman

15 N.Y.S. 969; 39 N.Y. St. Rep. 985; 1891 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 231 (New York Supplement)

Counsel

James M. Hunt, for appellant. T. & S. H. Fitch and Joseph F. Daly, (Theodore Fitch, of counsel,) for respondents.

Opinion of the Court

Dykman, J.

We cannot see that the statement of facts in the ninth paragraph of the complaint makes a new case. All decisions are based upon some reason, and frequently the difficulty which caused the defeat might liave been obviated, if suggested, but such oversight does not deprive the decision of finality; so we conclude that the decision of the court of appeals (23 N. E. Rep. 904) in the former action is conclusive, and that the judgment must be affirmed, with costs.

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