Morgenthau v. Walker
23 N.Y.S. 1161, 3 Misc. 615, 52 N.Y. St. Rep. 937
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Morgenthau v. Walker. Read the opinion of the Court — 21 N.Y.S. 936 →
Opinion
In Catlin v. Adirondack Co., 19 Hun, 389, 81 N. Y. 379, it was decided that a reversal of a judgment does not per se operate a vacatur of the order of reference. But a subsequent amendment of the Code (section 1011) provides that “the court must appoint another referee.” We merely reverse the judgment, and direct a new trial, leaving to the court below either to name another referee or to vacate the order of reference, as justice may seem to require.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Morgenthau v. Walker, 23 N.Y.S. 1161, 3 Misc. 615, 52 N.Y. St. Rep. 937 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1893).
23 N.Y.S. 1161 (Morgenthau v. Walker) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Catlin v. . Adirondack Company
81 N.Y. 379 (New York Court of Appeals, 1880)