Case ID: ad_140/html/0926-03.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam: Laughlin, J. (dissenting):", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Elwood O. Roessle, Respondent, v. Frederick J. Lancaster, Appellant.
    Appeal from a judgment entered upon the verdict of a jury and from an order denying a motion for a new trial.
   Per Curiam:

The questions in this case were substantially determined on the former appeal (130 App. Div. 1). No further discussion of the case is necessary, and as the questions there indicated were presented to the jury their verdict should control. The judgment and order are, therefore, affirmed, with costs. Present — Ingraham, P. J., McLaughlin, Laughlin (dissenting), Miller and Dowling, JJ.

Laughlin, J. (dissenting):

I dissent on the ground that the court erred in charging the plaintiff’s fifth request. . Judgment and order affirmed, with costs.