Case ID: ny-st-rep_41/html/0955-10.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Filed December 17, 1891.
    Mary T. Constant et al., Ex’rs, Resp’ts, v. The University of Rochester, Impl’d, App’lt.
    Appeal from judgment rendered in favor of plaintiff.
    
      Martin W. Cook, for app’lt; J. E. Parsons, for resp’ts.
   Per Curiam.

We have examined the record in the light of the opinion of the court of appeals (111 N. Y., 604; 20 St. Rep., 211), and find that the defects in the proof on the former trial have been supphed and that the present record requires an affirmance. For these reasons and those expressed by the trial judge in his opinion, printed on pages 70 and 71 of the case, the judgment appealed from must be affirmed, with costs.