Selden v. Vermilya
The Superior Court of New York City
Tins was a motion on the part of the defendants, to take a remittitur transmitted from the court of appeals, from the files of this court, to the end that it might be returned to the clerk of the court of appeals, with a view to enable the defendants to move that court for a correction of its decree in various particulars, in which they claimed that errors and omissions had inadvertently occurred.
Read the full summary
Tins was a motion on the part of the defendants, to take a remittitur transmitted from the court of appeals, from the files of this court, to the end that it might be returned to the clerk of the court of appeals, with a view to enable the defendants to move that court for a correction of its decree in various particulars, in which they claimed that errors and omissions had inadvertently occurred. After the decision of the cause in this court, reported in vol. 2, page 568, the complainant appealed to the court of appeals, where that decision was reversed, and a decree for partition entered.…
1Opinion of the CourtBy the Court. Duer, J.
In this case a decree has been made in the court of appeals, settling definitively the rights of the parties, but requiring in the execution of its details, that further proceedings shall be had in this court, and in order that these proceedings may be had, the cause has been remanded to us, and the remittitur having been filed, our exclusive jurisdiction over the case has been restored.
Under these circumstances, an application has been made to us on the part of the defendants, for an order directing the clerk to take the remittitur from the files of the court, and the effect of granting the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Murray v. BlatchfordCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1829
3Cited by3 opinions
- Griswold v. HavensNew York Supreme Court · 1863
- Hillyer v. VandewaterNew York Supreme Court · 1890
- Lawrence v. Bank of the RepublicThe Superior Court of New York City · 1866