Legal Opinion

Sage v. Broderick

New York Supreme Court

Decided January 29, 1931PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtRodenbeck, J.

The final determination of a special proceeding is expressed in a final order. “ Strictly speaking there can be no judgment absolute in a special proceeding at all because a special proceeding is terminated by an order (or by a decree in the Surrogate’s Court) and not by a judgment eo nomini.” (Matter of Gibson, 195 N. Y. 466, 469; Matter of Board of Education of Brooklyn, 11 N. Y. Supp. 780; Matter of City of New York v. Mitchell, 183 N. Y. 570; Civ. Prac. Act, §§ 1305, 1532.)

The use of the word “ adjudged ” in the final order is inappropriate, but the substantial error in the order is the…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. In Re the Probate of Will of GibsonNew York Court of Appeals · 1909
  2. In re Board of EducationNew York City Court · 1890
  3. Matter of City of New York v. . MitchellNew York Court of Appeals · 1906

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. In re City Bank Farmers Trust Co.New York Supreme Court · 1950

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

Powered by the Exa API