Legal Opinion

Livingston v. Manhattan Railway Co.

The Superior Court of New York City

Decided June 15, 1891Published

Motion for an order to vacate and set aside the report of a referee and for a further order directing the case to be sent back to the referee and that he be directed to make a report including all the facts found by him and conclusions of law. Action by Morgan L. Livingston and Silvia Livingston against the Manhattan Railway Co. and the Metropolitan Elevated Railway Co. for an injunction and damages.

Read the full summary

Motion for an order to vacate and set aside the report of a referee and for a further order directing the case to be sent back to the referee and that he be directed to make a report including all the facts found by him and conclusions of law. Action by Morgan L. Livingston and Silvia Livingston against the Manhattan Railway Co. and the Metropolitan Elevated Railway Co. for an injunction and damages. Defendants’ affidavit in support of the motion stated that the referee had made a large number of findings •and conclusions upon defendants’ requests, which he had not included in the report.

1Opinion of the CourtMcAdam, J.

Until the ruling in Schultheis v. McInerny [Gen’l Term, Supreme Court, 27 Abb. N. C. 193; 13 N. Y. Supp. 684], the time-h'onored practice was for the referee to find such facts as he deemed necessary to sustain his conclusions, and to pass upon the requests submitted by the adverse party. Both were printed in the appeal book, and the case was disposed of as if all the findings had been written upon one sheet •of paper. This practice worked well; while the innovation compels the referee to put together a mass •of matter not necessary to sustain his conclusions, and to an extent inharmonious as…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. Callanan v. . GilmanNew York Court of Appeals · 1887
  2. Place v. . HaywardNew York Court of Appeals · 1889
  3. Ward v. . CraigNew York Court of Appeals · 1882
  4. Todd v. . NelsonNew York Court of Appeals · 1888
  5. Wood v. . LaryNew York Court of Appeals · 1891

19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API