Mario v. Oteris

275 A.D.2d 790

This text of 275 A.D.2d 790 (Mario v. Oteris) 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
Mario v. Oteris, 275 A.D.2d 790 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1949).

Opinion

The record discloses that at the conclusion of the evidence the case was finally submitted to the trial court, without request for permission to submit findings or requests to find. No decision was made until upwards of three weeks there[791]*791after. Under such circumstances, section 439 of the Civil Practice Act has no application. However, since the judgment in favor of defendant was on the merits, and not a nonsuit, a decision, stating the facts which the trial court deemed essential, was required. (Civ. Prae. Act, § 440; Aufiero v. Aufiero, 222 App. Div. 479; Murphy v. Murphy, 223 App. Div. 701; Minner v. Minner, 238 N. Y. 529.) We are unable to determine, on the basis of the decision in the record, what facts the trial court deemed essential, or the allegations of the complaint as to which the trial court concluded that the plaintiff had not sustained the burden of proof. A new trial is not required, but a proper decision is necessary as a basis for the judgment appealed from. Since the case is remitted, and while we do not so direct, the court at Special Term may, if so advised, consider and pass upon the findings and requests to find heretofore submitted. Nolan, P. J., Carswell, Adel, Sneed and Wenzel, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Minner v. . Minner
144 N.E. 781 (New York Court of Appeals, 1924)
Aufiero v. Aufiero
222 A.D. 479 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1928)
Murphy v. Murphy
223 A.D. 701 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1928)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
275 A.D.2d 790, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mario-v-oteris-nyappdiv-1949.