City of Niagara Falls v. New York Central & Hudson River Railroad
New York Court of Appeals
Appeals from judgments of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the fourth judicial department, entered June 12, 1899, affirming judgments in favor of plaintiffs entered upon the report of a referee.
1Opinion of the CourtBartlett, J.
These cases were tried together before a referee, although separate judgments were entered. In the city case, the form of the referee’s report is a decision stating concisely the grounds upon which the issues were decided) while in the case of McIntyre the report states separately the facts found and the conclusions of law. (Code of Civil Procedure, § 1022.)
The practice under the' Constitution (Art. 6, § 9) and the Code of Civil Procedure (§ 191), which provide that nounani-. mous decision of the Appéllate Division of the Supreme Court that there is evidence supporting, or tending to sustain…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Trustees of Amherst College v. RitchNew York Court of Appeals · 1897
- Bissell v. . the New York Central R.R. CompanyNew York Court of Appeals · 1861
- Reed v. . McCordNew York Court of Appeals · 1899
- Marden v. . DorthyNew York Court of Appeals · 1899
- Lord v. . AtkinsNew York Court of Appeals · 1893
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Fayerweather v. RitchSupreme Court of the United States · 1904
- Hartley v. . Eagle Insurance Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1918
- McNevins v. Prudential Insurance Co. of AmericaNew York Supreme Court · 1908
- People Ex Rel. Krulish v. . FornesNew York Court of Appeals · 1903
- Shurtleff v. City of PikevilleCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1949
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.