Case Name: Henry Reinmiller, Respondent, v. Edwin T. Skidmore et al., Appellants
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1875-02-02
Citations: 59 N.Y. 661
Docket Number: 
Parties: Henry Reinmiller, Respondent, v. Edwin T. Skidmore et al., Appellants.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 59
Pages: 661–661

Head Matter:
Henry Reinmiller, Respondent, v. Edwin T. Skidmore et al., Appellants.
(Argued January 21, 1875;
decided February 2, 1875.)
Where a verdict is taken, subject to the opinion of the court at General Term, the judgment of the General Term thereon cannot be reviewed in this court unless a statement of the facts and the conclusions of law is prepared and filed with the judgment roll as prescribed by the Code. (Sec. 333.)
This was an appeal from a judgment of General Term, entered upon a verdict taken subject to the opinion of the court at General Term.
The return contained the case as heard at General Term with the judgment roll, without, however, any statement of the questions or conclusions of law and of the facts as required by section 333 of the Code. Held, that on account of the defect the appeal could not be sustained. The court cited Essex Co. Bank v. Russell (29 N. Y., 673); Jaycox v. Carman (49 id., 645).
S. W. Fullerton, for the appellants.
Amasa J. Parker for the respondent.

Opinion:
Miller, J.,
reads for dismissal of appeal.
All concur.
Appeal dismissed.