Rubin v. Prudence Bonds Corp.
New York Court of Appeals
1Per curiam
Questions of fact are presented by the record as to whether appellant improperly abandoned the case or was justifiably dismissed. Since the Appellate Division order fails to make the specifications required by section 602 of the Civil Practice Act, we are compelled to presume that questions of fact were not considered and to “ treat" the Appellate Division order as being a determination on the law only.” (See People ex rel. Sheffield Farms Co., Inc., v. Lilly, 295 N. Y. 354, 356; see, also, Tufts v. Stolz, 297 N. Y. 673.) So regarded, the Appellate Division order cannot be sustained. The…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- People Ex Rel. Sheffield Farms Co., Inc. v. LillyNew York Court of Appeals · 1946
- Tufts v. StolzNew York Court of Appeals · 1947
3Cited by1 opinion
- Axelrod v. KrupinskiNew York Court of Appeals · 1951