Caldwell v. the City of New York
Charles H. Caldwell, Appellant, v. the City of New York, Respondent
Headnotes
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam.
It is impossible for this court to pass upon the important questions of law involved in this case unless they shall be brought up hereafter by the defendant’s appeal from a judgment of affirmance against him *577 after a new trial conducted in accordance with the opinion of the Appellate Division. We are obliged to dismiss the present appeal upon the authority of Wright v. Smith ( 209 N. Y. 249 ), because there was an appeal to the Appellate Division from an order denying a motion for a new trial as well as an appeal from the judgment; and while the judgment was reversed the order of reversal does not show an affirmance so far as the facts were concerned. This is essential to give the Court of Appeals jurisdiction upon an appeal of this character.
The appeal should he dismissed, with costs.
Willard Bartlett, Oh. J., Werner, Chase, Collin, Cuddebacic and Hogan, JJ., concur; Miller, J., not sitting.
Appeal dismissed.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 1 case
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Most recent
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.