Carr v. Kimball

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Carr v. Kimball

151 A.D. 928, 136 N.Y.S. 347

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedJune 15, 1912

StatusPublished

This text of 151 A.D. 928 (Carr v. Kimball) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Carr v. Kimball, 151 A.D. 928, 136 N.Y.S. 347 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1912).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam:

The judgment of June 30, 1911, is clearly interlocutory. The amount of the recovery against the defendants had to be determined by a reference to be applied for at the foot of the judgment. The final judgment of March 28, 1912, confirming the report of the referee fixed the amount payable by the defendants and it is the final judgment in the action. The defendants appeal from that final judgment and also from the interlocutory judgment bringing up for review the determination of the court below holding the defendants hable. As the testimony before the refereé was not printed, of course the court on appeal will not pass upon its correctness or the regularity of the order of reference, that not having been appealed from. To present this question the record seems to be sufficient. The motion is, therefore, denied, with ten dollars costs. Present — Ingraham, P. J., Laughlin, Clarke, Miller- and Dowling, JJ. Motion denied, with ten dollars costs. Order to be settled on notice.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Per Curiam:

The judgment of June 30, 1911, is clearly interlocutory. The amount of the recovery against the defendants had to be determined by a reference to be applied for at the foot of the judgment. The final judgment of March 28, 1912, confirming the report of the referee fixed the amount payable by the defendants and it is the final judgment in the action. The defendants appeal from that final judgment and also from the interlocutory judgment bringing up for review the determination of the court below holding the defendants hable. As the testimony before the refereé was not printed, of course the court on appeal will not pass upon its correctness or the regularity of the order of reference, that not having been appealed from. To present this question the record seems to be sufficient. The motion is, therefore, denied, with ten dollars costs. Present — Ingraham, P. J., Laughlin, Clarke, Miller- and Dowling, JJ. Motion denied, with ten dollars costs. Order to be settled on notice.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

151 A.D. 928, 136 N.Y.S. 347, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/carr-v-kimball-nyappdiv-1912.