Edward B. Arnold, Appellant, v. John M. Robertson, Respondent

Edward B. Arnold, Appellant, v. John M. Robertson, Respondent. The rulings of this court, that error of law cannot be alleged upon appeal from an order and decision of an inferior court granting or refusing a new trial, where the trial was by jury, and the facts as well as the law were before the court, having been made sufficiently public to render them obligatory upon the public and the profession, if appeals from orders granting new trials are persisted in, instead of dismissals thereof, judgments absolute will be rendered against the appellants, in pursuance of their stipulations upon appeal. (Allen, J.; Peckham and Rapallo, JJ., concurring.) (Submitted November 27, 1872; decided December 3, 1872.) Appeal from order of the General Term of the Court of Common Pleas for the city and county of New York, reversing a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict, and reversing an order denying a motion for a new trial, and granting a new trial. The court dismissed the appeal in" accordance with the rulings in Wright v. Hunter (46 N. Y., 409) and Sands v. Crook (46 id., 564), holding that for the present it was proper to follow the practice adopted in those-cases. 'Allen, J., who wrote opinion, held that sufficient publicity had been given to the rulings in those cases, and that in accordance with the intimation in Dickson v. B. & S. A. R. R. Co. (47 N. Y., 507), the privilege of a dismissal should now cease, and that where parties persisted in such appeals they should be held to their stipulations, and júdgments absolute should go, against them in this. Peokhám. and Rapallo, JJ., concurred. George W. Wvngate .for the appellant. J. M. Bobertson, respondent in person. [MAJORITY — Allen, J.,] Allen, J., read opinion for affirmance, of order and. judgment absolute against plaintiff. Peokhám and Rapallo, JJ., "eonciirred, ■ For dismissal, Church, Ch. J.; Grover, Folg-er and Andrews, JJ.1 Appeal dismissed.