Palmer v. . the State of New York

New York Court of Appeals

Palmer v. . the State of New York

111 N.E. 211, 217 N.Y. 601, 1916 N.Y. LEXIS 1351

CourtNew York Court of Appeals

DecidedJanuary 18, 1916

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 111 N.E. 211 (Palmer v. . the State of New York) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Palmer v. . the State of New York, 111 N.E. 211, 217 N.Y. 601, 1916 N.Y. LEXIS 1351 (N.Y. 1916).

Pincite

Opinion

*602 Per Curiam.

' The question certified to us by the Appellate Division is not in such a form as to enable us to answer it. We are asked to say whether the service of the judgment was sufficient to start running the time within which the state was required to appeal. The answer to that question depends upon the choice to be made between conflicting versions of the transaction. If we accept as correct the affidavits submitted by the claimants, we may be led to one answer; if we accept as correct the affidavits submitted by the state, we may be led tó another. We are without power to decide a question, even though certified to us by the Appellate Division, if the answer makes it necessary to pass upon a question of fact (Matter of Westerfield, 163 N. Y. 209; Neresheimer v. Smyth, 167 N. Y. 202, 207).

The appeal should be dismissed, without costs to either party. •

Willard Bartlett, Ch. J., Hiscock, Hogan, Cardozo and Seabury, JJ., concur; Chase and Collin, JJ., dissent, and vote for reversal.

Appeal dismissed.

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

*602 Per Curiam.

' The question certified to us by the Appellate Division is not in such a form as to enable us to answer it. We are asked to say whether the service of the judgment was sufficient to start running the time within which the state was required to appeal. The answer to that question depends upon the choice to be made between conflicting versions of the transaction. If we accept as correct the affidavits submitted by the claimants, we may be led to one answer; if we accept as correct the affidavits submitted by the state, we may be led tó another. We are without power to decide a question, even though certified to us by the Appellate Division, if the answer makes it necessary to pass upon a question of fact (Matter of Westerfield, 163 N. Y. 209; Neresheimer v. Smyth, 167 N. Y. 202, 207).

The appeal should be dismissed, without costs to either party. •

Willard Bartlett, Ch. J., Hiscock, Hogan, Cardozo and Seabury, JJ., concur; Chase and Collin, JJ., dissent, and vote for reversal.

Appeal dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

111 N.E. 211, 217 N.Y. 601, 1916 N.Y. LEXIS 1351, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/palmer-v-the-state-of-new-york-ny-1916.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack