Murdock v. International Tile & Trim Co.

New York City Court

Murdock v. International Tile & Trim Co.

14 Misc. 225, 35 N.Y.S. 668, 70 N.Y. St. Rep. 486

DecidedOctober 15, 1895

StatusPublished

This text of 14 Misc. 225 (Murdock v. International Tile & Trim Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York City Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Murdock v. International Tile & Trim Co., 14 Misc. 225, 35 N.Y.S. 668, 70 N.Y. St. Rep. 486 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1895).

Pincite

Opinion

Clement, Ch. J.

This case is an action in equity to foreclose a. mechanic’s lien, and was tried before a referee. The referee did not report the form of the judgment, and, therefore, it was settled by the court. The Constitution' provides that no judge shall sit in review of his own decision, and,technically, I am disqualified from taking' any part in this appeal, for the reason, that the form of the judgment was settled by me, and I granted an allowance. On the argument I suggested, that there was a doubt in my mind .on- this question, and the attorneys agreed to waive the point. .The disqualification of a judge cannot be waived, an^ if judgment is rendered by this General Term, the same, could he set aside on motion, for the. reasons ■ stated. Oakley v. Aspinwall, S . N. Y. 547.

A reargument is, therefore, "ordered.

Van Wyck and Osborne, JJ., concur.

Reargument ordered.

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

Clement, Ch. J.

This case is an action in equity to foreclose a. mechanic’s lien, and was tried before a referee. The referee did not report the form of the judgment, and, therefore, it was settled by the court. The Constitution' provides that no judge shall sit in review of his own decision, and,technically, I am disqualified from taking' any part in this appeal, for the reason, that the form of the judgment was settled by me, and I granted an allowance. On the argument I suggested, that there was a doubt in my mind .on- this question, and the attorneys agreed to waive the point. .The disqualification of a judge cannot be waived, an^ if judgment is rendered by this General Term, the same, could he set aside on motion, for the. reasons ■ stated. Oakley v. Aspinwall, S . N. Y. 547.

A reargument is, therefore, "ordered.

Van Wyck and Osborne, JJ., concur.

Reargument ordered.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

14 Misc. 225, 35 N.Y.S. 668, 70 N.Y. St. Rep. 486, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/murdock-v-international-tile-trim-co-nycityct-1895.