New York Supreme Court, 1892

Sixth Ave. R. v. Metropolitan El. Ry. Co.

Sixth Ave. R. v. Metropolitan El. Ry. Co.
New York Supreme Court · Decided May 13, 1892
18 N.Y.S. 939; 46 N.Y. St. Rep. 961 (New York Supplement)

Counsel

Davies & liapallo, (i?. C. James, of counsel,) for appellants. Burrill, Zabriskie & Burrill, (J. E. Burrill and G. Zdbriskie, of counsel,) for respondent.

Sixth Ave. R. v. Metropolitan El. Ry. Co.

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam.

Upon examining the brief of the counsel for the appellants in this case we do not find any questions of law raised which have not been previously considered and disposed of by this court, and therefore it is not necessary to reconsider them upon this appeal. Upon the questions of fact involved, it does not appear that the learned judge below has committed any errors which would justify this court in reversing the judgment. The judgment should therefore be affirmed, witli costs.

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