Case ID: nys_64/html/0359-01.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

ROSE v. ANDREWS.
    (Supreme Court, Appellate Term.
    May 1, 1900.)
    Apfe al—Rulings—Exceptions—Review.
    Where no exceptions are taken to the court’s rulings at the trial, they cannot be reviewed on appeal.
    Appeal from city court of New York, general term.
    Action by Hudson P. Rose against Walter' E. Andrews. From a judgment of the general term (62 N. Y. Supp. 1146) affirming judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals.
    Affirmed.
    Argued before TRUAX, P. J., and SCOTT and DUGRO, JJ.
    Charles P. Hallock, for appellant.
    Oliver W. Beals, for respondent.
   PER CURIAM.

We have carefully examined the record, and find no reversible error. The questions involved were purely matters of fact, as to which the jury found in plaintiff’s favor. The exceptions are without merit, and as to most of the objections sought to be raised on appeal the defendant took neither objection nor exception.

Judgment and order appealed from affirmed, with costs.