Case ID: ny-st-rep_26/html/0114-01.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

Shirley J. Green, Resp’t, v. Noah B. Shute, Impleaded, etc., App’lt.
    
      (City Court of New York, General Term,
    
    
      Filed October 3, 1889.)
    
    Practice — Direction of verdict.
    Where each party requests the direction of a verdict in his favor, neither can thereafter complain that a direction was improper.
    Appeal from judgment directed by trial judge.
    
      Seaman & Conger, for app’lt; William G. McCrea, for resp’t.
   Per Curiam.

The case presented a disputed question of fact, and either party had the right to require its submission to the jury, who might have decided the question submitted for plaintiff or defendant. Bach side, however, requested a direction of a verdict in his favor, and neither can complain now that a direction was improper. Strong v. N. Y. Laundry Co., 6 Hun, 528; Leggett v. Hyde, 58 N. Y., 275; Koehler v. Adler, 78 id., 287; Ormes v. Dauchy, 82 id., 443; Dillon v. Cockcroft, 90 id., 649. If the jury had voluntarily rendered the verdict the trial judge directed, it would have been regarded as conclusive on the evidence. Under the authorities citecl, the direction by the trial judge is to be similarly considered. In this view there was no error committed at the trial, and the judgment entered on the direction must be affirmed, with costs.

McAdam, Ch. J., and Nehrbas, J., concur.