Legal Opinion · Dissent

Kamerman v. Curtis

New York Court of Appeals

Decided April 17, 1941Published

1DissentFinch, J.

It is submitted that a reversal of this judgment would in any event be placing too much emphasis on procedure at the expense of the merits, in addition to disregarding the command of the statute that we disregard errors if any which would not change the result. (Civ. Prac. Act, § 105.) But where is the error which compels a reversal?

The opinion as submitted seeks a reversal upon a consideration of the pleadings alone, taking no notice of the fact that a trial has been had in which findings of fact and conclusions of law have been made, that an interlocutory judgment has been entered from…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Kley v. . HealyNew York Court of Appeals · 1891
  2. Strout v. Cross, Austin & Ireland Lumber Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1940
  3. Livingston v. LivingstonNew York Court of Appeals · 1927

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API