Case Name: Emanuel Weil, Resp't, v. Frank Eckstein, App'lt
Court: New York Court of Common Pleas
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1887-04-04
Citations: 6 N.Y. St. Rep. 298
Docket Number: 
Parties: Emanuel Weil, Resp’t, v. Frank Eckstein, App’lt.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York State Reporter
Volume: 6
Pages: 298–299

Head Matter:
Emanuel Weil, Resp’t, v. Frank Eckstein, App’lt.
(New York Common Pleas, General Term,
Filed April 4, 1887.)
Appeal—When leave to go to court of appeals will be denied.
A motion for leave to go to court of appeals will not be granted where there is nothing in the appeal worth considering, but questions of fact.
S. H. Randall, for app’lt; Herman Fox, for resp’t.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
There is absolutely nothing in this case to warrant us in sending it to the court of appeals.
The exceptions taken at the trial present no question of law that is either novel or unsettled. It is impossible that any court could consider the testimony that was excluded admissible.
Of course the court of appeals is not the proper tribunal to Esten to arguments concerning controverted questions of fact; and there is nothing in this appeal worth considering but questions of fact.
Motion for leave to go to the court of appeals must be denied with costs.