Rust v. . Hauselt

New York Court of Appeals

Rust v. . Hauselt

69 N.Y. 485, 1877 N.Y. LEXIS 868

CourtNew York Court of Appeals

DecidedMay 22, 1877

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 69 N.Y. 485 (Rust v. . Hauselt) 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

Rust v. . Hauselt, 69 N.Y. 485, 1877 N.Y. LEXIS 868 (N.Y. 1877).

Pincite

Opinion

Rapallo, J.

This action was tried before the court without a jury, and the judge made findings of facts which, upon their face, disclosed no error in his conclusions of law. There were no requests to find any further facts, and but two exceptions are relied upon, viz., exceptions to the fifth and sixth findings of facts.

On appeal to the General Term the judgment was reversed. No new trial was ordered, and the order of reversal does not state that it was made upon any question of fact. I have carefully examined the case upon its merits, and have come to the conclusion that, from the manner in which it is presented to this court, no judgment can be rendered by us, consistently with established rules of practice, which would not in all probability do injustice to one side or the other. I am, therefore, of opinion that the appeal should be dismissed on the ground that it is not an appeal from an order granting or refusing a new trial, nor from a final judgment of the court below. The order appealed from is a simple order of reversal, upon which no judgment appears to have been entered. From such an order an appeal does not lie to this court.

The appeal should be dismissed, with costs.

All concur ; Andrews, J., absent.

Appeal dismissed.

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

Rapallo, J.

This action was tried before the court without a jury, and the judge made findings of facts which, upon their face, disclosed no error in his conclusions of law. There were no requests to find any further facts, and but two exceptions are relied upon, viz., exceptions to the fifth and sixth findings of facts.

On appeal to the General Term the judgment was reversed. No new trial was ordered, and the order of reversal does not state that it was made upon any question of fact. I have carefully examined the case upon its merits, and have come to the conclusion that, from the manner in which it is presented to this court, no judgment can be rendered by us, consistently with established rules of practice, which would not in all probability do injustice to one side or the other. I am, therefore, of opinion that the appeal should be dismissed on the ground that it is not an appeal from an order granting or refusing a new trial, nor from a final judgment of the court below. The order appealed from is a simple order of reversal, upon which no judgment appears to have been entered. From such an order an appeal does not lie to this court.

The appeal should be dismissed, with costs.

All concur ; Andrews, J., absent.

Appeal dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

69 N.Y. 485, 1877 N.Y. LEXIS 868, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rust-v-hauselt-ny-1877.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack