Seneca Distributing Co. v. . Fulton
New York Court of Appeals
Appeal — when reversal by Appellate Division “ upon the facts ” must be presumed to have been made upon the law. Where the Appellate Division reversed á judgment entered upon findings made at Trial Term “ upon the facts ” without further specification, it must be conclusively presumed that the reversal was made upon the law in accordance with section 1338 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
Read the full summary
Appeal — when reversal by Appellate Division “ upon the facts ” must be presumed to have been made upon the law. Where the Appellate Division reversed á judgment entered upon findings made at Trial Term “ upon the facts ” without further specification, it must be conclusively presumed that the reversal was made upon the law in accordance with section 1338 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered January 19, 1917, reversing a judgment in favor of defendant entered upon a dismissal of the…
1Opinion of the CourtCubbeback, J.
This case was tried before the court without a jury and the court made findings of fact and conclusions of law upon which judgment for the defendant was entered.
The Appellate Division reversed the judgment and granted a new trial. The reversal was “ upon the facts ” without further specification in the judgment.
In its opinion the Appellate Division referred to certain findings of the Special Term as being against the evidence.
This is not in compliance with section 1338 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which says with regard to reversals at the Appellate Division: “it must be conclusively…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Beatty v. . Guggenheim Exploration Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1918
3Cited by1 opinion
- Partola Manufacturing Co. v. General Chemical Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1922