Velleman v. . Rohrig

86 N.E. 476, 193 N.Y. 439, 1908 N.Y. LEXIS 664
CourtNew York Court of Appeals
DecidedNovember 24, 1908
StatusPublished
Cited by10 cases

This text of 86 N.E. 476 (Velleman v. . Rohrig) 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
Velleman v. . Rohrig, 86 N.E. 476, 193 N.Y. 439, 1908 N.Y. LEXIS 664 (N.Y. 1908).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Hpon the argument it was insisted by the learned counsel for the respondent that no appeal could be taken to this court, without permission, -from an order for the distribution of surplus moneys arising upon the foreclosure of a mortgage by action.

Such appeals have been before us since the adoption of the revised Constitution, and we have uniformly held that we had jurisdiction to decide them, because such, orders, even if entitled in the action, are not made therein, but in a special proceeding commenced after the action is ended by a final judgment which effects every object that the action was brought to accomplish. (Bushwick Savings Bank v. Traum, 158 N. Y. 668; 26 App. Div. 532.) As it seems that we have made no public announcement of the rule, for in the case cited we affirmed on the opinion below and in other cases without an opinion, we now announce it for the information of the profession.

*441 We think that the action of the courts below in the proceeding now before us was in accordance with law for the reasons stated in the prevailing opinion of the Appellate Division, and we, therefore, affirm the order appealed from, with costs.

Cullen, Ch. J., Gray, Haight, Yann, Willard Bartlett, Hiscock and Chase, JJ., concur.

Order affirmed.

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

Related

Roslyn Savings Bank v. Jones
69 Misc. 2d 733 (New York Supreme Court, 1972)
State v. Rodriguez
169 N.E.2d 444 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 1959)
Hewig v. Kleinman
282 A.D. 1001 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1953)
Best v. Patten
158 Misc. 8 (New York Supreme Court, 1936)
Douglass v. Chisholm
142 Misc. 869 (New York Supreme Court, 1931)
Lobbett v. Galpin
228 A.D. 65 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1930)
Walker v. Carroll
123 Misc. 712 (New York Supreme Court, 1923)
Syracuse Savings Bank v. Stokes
71 Misc. 508 (New York Supreme Court, 1911)
Conlon v. . Kelly
92 N.E. 109 (New York Court of Appeals, 1910)
House v. Amsdell Brewing & Malting Co.
133 A.D. 486 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1909)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
86 N.E. 476, 193 N.Y. 439, 1908 N.Y. LEXIS 664, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/velleman-v-rohrig-ny-1908.