Case Name: BALZ v. SHAW
Court: New York City Court
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1895-02-11
Citations: 32 N.Y.S. 220
Docket Number: 
Parties: BALZ v. SHAW.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's New York Supplement
Volume: 32
Pages: 220–220

Head Matter:
(11 Misc. Rep. 444.)
BALZ v. SHAW.
(City Court of New York, General Term.
February 11, 1895.)
Appeal—Practice—Settlement of Case.
A settlement of the case on appeal by the trial judge is conclusive, where the facts are disputed. Hearing v. Pearson (City Ct. N. Y.) 26 N. Y. Supp. 74, followed.
Appeal from special term.
Action by Jacob Balz against Daniel M. Shaw. From an order declining to correct the case on appeal, plaintiff appeals. Affirmed. Argued before EHRLICH, O. J., and NEWBURGER, J.
John P. Schuchman, for appellant.
J. M. Fiske, for respondent.

Opinion:
EHRLICH, C. J.
The order appealed from having been made by
trial judge, we think we must, in view of the facts, accept his certification as conclusive thereon. To do otherwise would be to substitute our opinion for his knowledge. There was a dispute as to what occurred, and the trial judge determined it. Green v. Shute (City Ct. N. Y.) 7 N. Y. Supp. 69; Dearing v. Pearson (City Ct. N. Y.) 26 N. Y. Supp. 74, affirmed (Com. Pl. N. Y.) 28 N. Y. Supp. 715. For these reasons the order appealed from must be affirmed, with costs.