Pistor v. . Hatfield
New York Court of Appeals
Appeal from order of the late General Term of the first judicial district, dismissing plaintiff’s appeal from an order of Special Term, setting aside an inquest and judgment entered thereon. This action was brought, to recover back money paid under a judgment which had been reversed. Defendant set up three defences; first. That the court had no jurisdiction to reverse the judgment; second. That one of the defendants had appealed; and third. A denial of payment.
Read the full summary
Appeal from order of the late General Term of the first judicial district, dismissing plaintiff’s appeal from an order of Special Term, setting aside an inquest and judgment entered thereon. This action was brought, to recover back money paid under a judgment which had been reversed. Defendant set up three defences; first. That the court had no jurisdiction to reverse the judgment; second. That one of the defendants had appealed; and third. A denial of payment. Plaintiff demurred to the first two counts of defendants’ answer. The demurrer was sustained. From the order defendant appealed, but…
1Opinion of the CourtGrover, J.
Section 8 of the Constitution provides, that no judge shall sit at General Term in review of his own decision. The case showed that Justice Ingraham, who made the order appealed from at Special Term, was a member of the General Term, by which the order dismissing the appeal was made. He was incompetent to sit upon a review of the order upon its merits, or to take part in determining, whether the order was appealable to the General Term, as the latter inquiry, involves an examination of the order equally with a determination of the appeal upon the merits. Hence, the General Term, as…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Payne v. SatterfieldTennessee Supreme Court · 1904
- Van Arsdale v. . KingNew York Court of Appeals · 1897