Case Name: John L. Gross, Appellant, v. William L. Moore, as Administrator, etc., Respondent; Francis G. Van Woert and Others, as Executors, etc., and Rachel B. March, Appellants
Court: New York Supreme Court, General Term
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1895-12
Citations: 98 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 643
Docket Number: 
Parties: John L. Gross, Appellant, v. William L. Moore, as Administrator, etc., Respondent; Francis G. Van Woert and Others, as Executors, etc., and Rachel B. March, Appellants.
Judges: Present— Yan Brunt, P. J., O’Brien and Parker, JJ.
Reporter: Supreme Court Reports (Hun)
Volume: 98
Pages: 643–644

Head Matter:
John L. Gross, Appellant, v. William L. Moore, as Administrator, etc., Respondent; Francis G. Van Woert and Others, as Executors, etc., and Rachel B. March, Appellants.

Opinion:
—Appeal dismissed.—
Per Curiam:
We do not understand the practice which has been pursued in the case at bar. There is nothing in the record to indicate the character of the action, as it commences, after the formal statement, with a so-called interlocutory decree; and it also contain? another interlocutory decree appointing a referee. The referee reported, and a motion was made to confirm the report, and from the order thereupon entered the appeal was taken. It seems to us that the proper practice would have been at least to have printed the judgment roll; and upon the coming in of the referee's report to have entered a final judgment, and to appeal from such final judgment. There is nothing in the Code which authorizes the practice which has been pursued in the case at bar. The appeal should be dismissed.
Present— Yan Brunt, P. J., O'Brien and Parker, JJ.