Zunz v. Heroy

New York Court of Common Pleas

Zunz v. Heroy

23 N.Y.S. 15, 52 N.Y. St. Rep. 123

DecidedApril 3, 1893

StatusPublished

This text of 23 N.Y.S. 15 (Zunz v. Heroy) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Common Pleas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Zunz v. Heroy, 23 N.Y.S. 15, 52 N.Y. St. Rep. 123 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1893).

Pincite

Opinion

PEB CUBIAM.

An appeal from a final judgment brings up for review an interlocutory judgment which has not already been reviewed upon a separate appeal therefrom. Code Civil Proc. § 1316. The interlocutory judgment in this action was affirmed at gen[16]*16eral term upon appeal by the present appellant, (Zunz v. Heroy, [Com. Pl. N. Y.] 7 N. Y. Supp. 644,) and is therefore conclusive upon us. The closest scrutiny of the evidence and proceedings before the referee on the accounting directed by the interlocutory judgment, which involved the examination of much testimony and numerous exhibits,—labor which the many inaccuracies in the brief of appellants’ counsel did not tend to diminish,—has not enabled us to discover any error. The referee’s findings of fact are abundantly supported by the evidence, and his conclusions of law are fully warranted by the facts found.

The judgment and orders should be aifirmed, with costs.

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

PEB CUBIAM.

An appeal from a final judgment brings up for review an interlocutory judgment which has not already been reviewed upon a separate appeal therefrom. Code Civil Proc. § 1316. The interlocutory judgment in this action was affirmed at gen[16]*16eral term upon appeal by the present appellant, (Zunz v. Heroy, [Com. Pl. N. Y.] 7 N. Y. Supp. 644,) and is therefore conclusive upon us. The closest scrutiny of the evidence and proceedings before the referee on the accounting directed by the interlocutory judgment, which involved the examination of much testimony and numerous exhibits,—labor which the many inaccuracies in the brief of appellants’ counsel did not tend to diminish,—has not enabled us to discover any error. The referee’s findings of fact are abundantly supported by the evidence, and his conclusions of law are fully warranted by the facts found.

The judgment and orders should be aifirmed, with costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

23 N.Y.S. 15, 52 N.Y. St. Rep. 123, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/zunz-v-heroy-nyctcompl-1893.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack