From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Smith v. Schwarzler

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 1, 1902
77 App. Div. 634 (N.Y. App. Div. 1902)

Opinion

December Term, 1902.

Present — Van Brunt, P.J., O'Brien, Ingraham, McLaughlin and Hatch, JJ.


Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements.


We think the learned judge at Special Term correctly held that this case in principle is controlled by Stuyvesant v. Early ( 58 App. Div. 242). In view of the fact that the injunction in some form must be continued until the trial, nothing would be gained by a determination now as to the extent, if any, to which the order as entered should be modified. The injunction order is extensive in terms, but the question of whether or not the plaintiff is entitled to such extensive relief can better be determined upon the trial when after the presentation of all the facts the court will be enabled to formulate by judgment the exact relief to which the plaintiff is entitled. The order appealed from is accordingly affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements.


Summaries of

Smith v. Schwarzler

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 1, 1902
77 App. Div. 634 (N.Y. App. Div. 1902)
Case details for

Smith v. Schwarzler

Case Details

Full title:W. Stebbins Smith, Respondent, v. Martin Schwarzler, Appellant

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Dec 1, 1902

Citations

77 App. Div. 634 (N.Y. App. Div. 1902)
79 N.Y.S. 1147

Citing Cases

Hunter v. Chicago, St. P. M. O. Ry. Co.

But judgment notwithstanding the verdict should not be granted by this court unless the evidence is…

Ginsberg v. Williams

But, as defendant points out, the decision was later limited to the facts of the case and the holding…