People Ex Rel. Chemical Bank & Trust Co. v. Miller

New York Court of Appeals

People Ex Rel. Chemical Bank & Trust Co. v. Miller

50 N.E.2d 646, 291 N.Y. 507, 1943 N.Y. LEXIS 1678

CourtNew York Court of Appeals

DecidedJuly 20, 1943

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 50 N.E.2d 646 (People Ex Rel. Chemical Bank & Trust Co. v. Miller) 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

People Ex Rel. Chemical Bank & Trust Co. v. Miller, 50 N.E.2d 646, 291 N.Y. 507, 1943 N.Y. LEXIS 1678 (N.Y. 1943).

Pincite

Opinion

Order affirmed, without costs to either party; no opinion. *

Concur: Lehman, Ch. J., Loughran, Rippey, Lewis, Conway and Desmond, JJ. Taking no part: Thacher, J.

*

In the above ease, and also in three other companion eases argued on the same day, namely, People ex rel. Bryant Park Building, Inc., v. Miller, 291 N. Y. 528; People ex rel. Prudential Insurance Co. v. Lilly, 291 N. Y. 600, and People ex rel. MacCracken v. Miller, 291 N. Y. 55, the city contended that “the Appellate Division may not substitute its finding of value for the finding of the trial Justice unless the latter finding is clearly contrary to the weight of the credible evidence,” citing Matter of City of New York (Newtown Creek), 284 N. Y. 493. Lehman, Ch. J., in his opinion in the MacCracken case, rejected such contention, saying: “We find no authority in the cited case or in other cases decided by this court for any differentiation in the powers of the Appellate Division to review and set aside findings of value by the Special Term in a certiorari proceeding and its powers to reverse findings of fact made by Special Term in any other special proceedings or actions.” (291 N. Y. 55, 60.) — [Rep.

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

Order affirmed, without costs to either party; no opinion. *

Concur: Lehman, Ch. J., Loughran, Rippey, Lewis, Conway and Desmond, JJ. Taking no part: Thacher, J.

*

In the above ease, and also in three other companion eases argued on the same day, namely, People ex rel. Bryant Park Building, Inc., v. Miller, 291 N. Y. 528; People ex rel. Prudential Insurance Co. v. Lilly, 291 N. Y. 600, and People ex rel. MacCracken v. Miller, 291 N. Y. 55, the city contended that “the Appellate Division may not substitute its finding of value for the finding of the trial Justice unless the latter finding is clearly contrary to the weight of the credible evidence,” citing Matter of City of New York (Newtown Creek), 284 N. Y. 493. Lehman, Ch. J., in his opinion in the MacCracken case, rejected such contention, saying: “We find no authority in the cited case or in other cases decided by this court for any differentiation in the powers of the Appellate Division to review and set aside findings of value by the Special Term in a certiorari proceeding and its powers to reverse findings of fact made by Special Term in any other special proceedings or actions.” (291 N. Y. 55, 60.) — [Rep.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

50 N.E.2d 646, 291 N.Y. 507, 1943 N.Y. LEXIS 1678, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-ex-rel-chemical-bank-trust-co-v-miller-ny-1943.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack