Board of Supervisors v. Bristol
New York Supreme Court
The plaintiffs sued Bristol, defaulting county treasurer, and Ms sureties to recover $5,194 county funds and $7,997 funds of infant heirs. Judgment was rendered by the referee for $6,130 county funds and costs. Both parties appealed. The defendants appealed “ from the said judgment and every part thereof,” and excepted specifically to the finding of fact and conclusions of law upon which the referee based Ms judgment. The general term affirmed the judgment, with costs.
Read the full summary
The plaintiffs sued Bristol, defaulting county treasurer, and Ms sureties to recover $5,194 county funds and $7,997 funds of infant heirs. Judgment was rendered by the referee for $6,130 county funds and costs. Both parties appealed. The defendants appealed “ from the said judgment and every part thereof,” and excepted specifically to the finding of fact and conclusions of law upon which the referee based Ms judgment. The general term affirmed the judgment, with costs. The plaintiffs thereupon entered judgment, having previously, on notice, taxed the costs of the appeal at $172.83, and issued…
1Opinion of the CourtBockes, J.
The difficulty in this ease arises out of the irregularity in the practice adopted by the parties following the decision of the appeals.
Regarding the notes in the record, declaratory of the decision of the general term, as a memorandum merely, and the appeals have never been properly disposed of on the record. The memorandum should have been followed on the record by a judgment declaring the decision or adjudication suggested by it, fully, as regards any, and all rights to which the parties were entitled under it. The memorandum was, “ judgment affirmed, with costs.” There were cross-appeals…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Martin v. TarboxAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1898