Sautter v. Frick
This text of 227 A.D. 760 (Sautter v. Frick) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
This action was tried before the court without a jury. There are no findings of facts or conclusions of law, and no decision which authorized the entry of the judgment appealed from. The opinion of the trial court cannot take the place of a formal decision. The appeal should, therefore, be dismissed, and the matter remitted to" the Special Term to supply the defect. (Minner v. Minner, 238 N. Y. 529; Ventimiglia v. Eichner, 213 id. 147; Herder v. Clifford, 225 App. Div. 780; Electric Boat Co. v. Howey, 96 id. 410.) All concur. Present — Sears, P. J., Taylor, Edgeomb, Thompson and Crosby, JJ. Appeal dismissed, without costs, and matter remitted to the Special Term to supply the defect. [133 Misc. 517.]
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
227 A.D. 760, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sautter-v-frick-nyappdiv-1929.