Case Name: David Selden vs. Thomas Vermilya and others
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1848-11
Citations: 3 How. Pr. 338
Docket Number: 
Parties: David Selden vs. Thomas Vermilya and others.
Judges: 
Reporter: Howard's Practice Reports
Volume: 3
Pages: 338–338

Head Matter:
COURT OF APPEALS,
NOVEMBER TERM, 1848.
David Selden vs. Thomas Vermilya and others.
The right to appeal from an order of the Supreme Court at a general term, made after the 1st of July last, depends upon the code, (Mayor of New York v. Schermerhorn, ante, page 334,) although the suit may have been commenced prior to that time.
An order at special term dissolving a temporary injunction, reheard and confirmed at general term, is not an appealable case under the code, (§ 282, II.)
On a bill filed, a temporary injunction was granted restraining the sale of the property in controversy pending the litigation. Pending the suit, in September, 1847, the Supreme Court, in special term, made an order dissolving the injunction; which order was confirmed by the Supreme Court on a rehearing in general term, in September last. From the order made at the general term the complainant appealed to this court.
G. F. Comstock, for the Respondent, moved to dismiss the appeal.
P. Y. Cutter, for the Appellant.

Opinion:
Bronson, J.
Although this suit was commenced prior to the first of July, yet as the order of the general term dissolving the injunction was made since that day, the right to appeal depends on the Code of Procedure. (Mayor of New York, v. Schermerhorn, ante, page 334.) And it is quite clear that the code does not give an appeal in such a case. (§ 282, 11.) Motion granted.