Bauer v. Bauer
New York Supreme Court
This is an action for divorce upon the ground of adultery. By stipulation of the parties it was agreed that such case should he tried before a referee, whereupon the court, at Special Term, appointed a referee to hear and determine the same. The referee found in favor of the defendant. The court, at Special Term, refused to confirm the report of the referee. The plaintiff now moves for the appointment of a new referee to hear and determine such action.
1Opinion of the CourtHebbick, J.
It was within the power of the Special Term to refuse to confirm the report of the referee, but it has no power to direct judgment contrary to the report of the referee. Gorham v. Gorham, 40 App. Div. 564; Goldner v. Goldner, 49 id. 395.
While this authority of the court to refuse to confirm the report of the referee seems to be well settled, the practice as to future proceedings does not appear to be settled. In each of the cases referred to the parties "were directed to take such proceedings as they might be advised, without any intimation as to what such proceedings should be. It seems to…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Matthews v. MatthewsNew York Supreme Court · 1889
- Gorham v. GorhamAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1899