Case ID: ny-sup-ct_98/html/0294-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Pjiatt, J. :", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Cecilia Beebe, as Administratrix, etc., of William H. Beebe, Deceased, Respondent, v. The New York and New England Railroad Company, Appellant.
    
      Appeal — a ease, containing no order denying a new, trial and no ces'tificate that it contains all the evidence, brings up only questions of law.
    
    Where the case upon appeal contains no order denying a motion for a new trial upon the minutes of the justice, and there is no certificate that the case contains all the evidence given upon the trial, the appellate court can only consider the questions of law which are contained in the record.
    Appeal by the defendant, The New York and New England Railroad Company, from a judgment of the Supreme Court in favor of the plaintiff, entered in the office of the clerk of the county of Orange on the 20th day of April, 1895, upon the verdict of a jury rendered after a trial at the Orange County Circuit, with notice of an intention to bring up for review on such appeal the order denying the defendant’s motion for a new trial made upon the minutes, and also the orders made on said trial denying the defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint, and for a nonsuit.
    
      Walter O. Anthony, for the appellant.
    
      John M. Gardner, for the respondent.
   Pjiatt, J. :

Tliis is an appeal from a judgment entered, upon a verdict of a jury. There is no order contained in the record denying a motion for a new trial made upon the judge’s minutes and no certificate that the case contains all the evidence given upon the trial; therefore, under the rule, all we can consider upon this appeal are questions of law contained in the record.

Upon examining the case thei e appears to have been only one exception taken, to wit, that to a question put by the court which was clearly competent. Under these circumstances there is no alternative to an affirmance of the judgment.

The judgment must be affirmed, with costs.

Brown, P. J., and Dykman, J., concurred.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.