Case ID: ny-st-rep_37/html/0688-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Ehrlich, Ch. J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

John A. Gaylord et al., Resp’ts, v. John D. Karst, Jr., App’lt.
    
      (City Court of New York, General Term,
    
    
      Filed March 10, 1891.)
    
    Trial—Limitation op time for summing up.
    The question as to the time to be allowed for summing up a case rests largely in the discretion of the trial judge, and "his decision, except in case of clear abuse, should be approved.
    Appeal from judgment entered on verdict in favor of plaintiff.
    
      Lewis Sanders, for pl’ff; J E. Eustis, for resp’ts.
   Ehrlich, Ch. J.

A careful reading of the printed case and points satisfies us that the rulings made by the learned trial judge were correct, and that there is nothing in the exceptions requiring a new trial. The evidence amply sustains the verdict, which is not excessive in amount. The appellant’s counsel claims that he was limited to ten minutes’ time in summing up, and that this 'limitation was an abuse of discretion. There can be no doubt as to the power of a trial judge in limiting the time of counsel in summing up. The power has been frequently exercised and the authority sustained. This question must be left largely to the discretion of the trial judge to bo exercised according to circumstances, and his decision on the subject ought, except in case of clear abuse, to be approved. We think there was no abuse of discretion in this instance, and that on the entire case, the judgment appealed from ought to be affirmed, with costs.

Yan Wyck, J., concurs.