Case Name: Rosecrance v. Hollister
Court: New York Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1874-10
Citations: 5 Thomp. & Cook 710
Docket Number: 
Parties: Rosecrance v. Hollister.
Judges: 
Reporter: Thompson & Cook's Supreme Court Reports
Volume: 5
Pages: 710–710

Head Matter:
FOURTH DEPARTMENT.
GENERAL TERM, OCTOBER, 1874.
Rosecrance v. Hollister.
Reference — when findings of fact will not be disturbed.
Where the question is one of fact and there is abundant evidence to sustain the findings of a referee, the findings will not be disturbed on appeal.
Appeal by plaintiffs from a judgment dismissing the complaint entered upon the report of a referee. The action was brought in Genesee county by Daniel Bosecrance and George H. Bobertson, receiver, etc., of Marcus Hollister, against Marcus Hollister and another to set aside a conveyance as fraudulent.
Geo. Bowen, for appellants.
William, Tyrrell, for respondents.

Opinion:
Gilbert, J.
The question was wholly one of fact and the court declined to interfere on the ground mentioned in the head-note.
Judgment affirmed.