Marshall v. Hayward

67 A.D. 137, 73 N.Y.S. 592
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided July 1, 1901·Published·Cited by 7 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam :

This purports to be a controversy submitted pursuant to section 1279 et seq. of the Code of Civil Procedure. We are asked for our opinion upon three formulated questions, but we are not authorized to direct judgment upon the determination of them. Until the parties stipulate that a judgment may be directed herein and also what the nature of the judgment shall be, in view of the contentions of the respective parties, we cannot exercise any jurisdiction in the matter.

Present — Goodrich, P. J., Bartlett, Hirschberg, Jerks and Sewell, JJ.

Proceedings dismissed, without costs.

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

Marshall v. Hayward, 67 A.D. 137, 73 N.Y.S. 592 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1901).

67 A.D. 137 (Marshall v. Hayward) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Goodman v. Hyman
2 A.D.2d 751 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1956)
Stoddard v. William A. Davis Co.
220 P. 115 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1923)
Waitt Investing Co. v. Robbins
193 A.D. 898 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1920)
Denver Tramway Co. v. Bankers Trust Co.
180 A.D. 433 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1917)
Woodruff v. . People
86 N.E. 562 (New York Court of Appeals, 1908)
Sweet v. Schliemann
88 N.Y.S. 1117 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1904)
In re Yerks' Estate
85 N.Y.S. 1151 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1903)