Case Name: Cornelius A. Van Wagener, Resp't, v. William B. Royce et al., Adm'rs, App'lts
Court: New York Supreme Court, General Term
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1892-12-12
Citations: 50 N.Y. St. Rep. 935
Docket Number: 
Parties: Cornelius A. Van Wagener, Resp't, v. William B. Royce et al., Adm'rs, App'lts.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York State Reporter
Volume: 50
Pages: 935–936

Head Matter:
Cornelius A. Van Wagener, Resp't, v. William B. Royce et al., Adm'rs, App'lts.
Motion for reargument.
B. F. Low, for motion;
Greene & Bedell, opposed.

Opinion:
Dykman, J.
This is a motion for a reargument of'the appeal of the defendants in this action.
There is a general statement in the affidavit upon which the motion is based that important facts have been overlooked by tins court, but there is no specification of such facts, and we know of none.
On the contrary, the case received a careful examination here, as our opinion will show, and a re-examination has disclosed nothing that was overlooked by us.
The motion-should be denied, with ten dollars costs and disbursements.
Barnard, P J., and Pratt, J., concur.