Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
General
The People of the State of New York v. The St. Nicholas Bank of New York; Hugh J. Grant, Receiver, Appellant; In re Claim of D. O. Mills, Respondent
150 N.Y. 563·New York Court of Appeals·1896·NY
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
The People of the State of New York v. The St. Nicholas Bank of New York; Hugh J. Grant, Receiver, Appellant; In re Claim of D. O. Mills, Respondent.
(Decided October 6, 1896.)
This was a motion to advance an appeal from a judgment for costs and from the order upon which the same was entered, being an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, made April 10, 1896, which affirmed an order of Special Term overruling exceptions to the report of a referee appointed under the statute (2 R. S. 45, §§ 19, 24 and 25, as amended by chap. 373, Laws of 1862) to determine a controversy between the claimant, D. O. Mills, and the receiver of the St. Nicholas Bank, and confirmed the same. (See People v. American Loan & Trust Co., ante, p. 117.)
Motion denied on the ground that this was not an order finally determining a special proceeding within the provision of the Constitution. Such an order is only re viewable here when certified to this court by the Appellate Division.