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.
Peter Thornton et al., Respondents, v. Gustav Autenreith, Appellant, 1873 — 55 N.Y. 659 · caselaw · US
Administrative
Peter Thornton et al., Respondents, v. Gustav Autenreith, Appellant
55 N.Y. 659·New York Court of Appeals·1873·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
Peter Thornton et al., Respondents, v. Gustav Autenreith, Appellant.
(Submitted December 5, 1873;
decided December 16, 1873.)
This was an appeal from an order of General Term reversing a judgment in favor of defendant entered upon the report of a referee.
The order appealed from did not state that it was reversed upon questions of fact, although it so appeared by the opinions of the General Term. Held, that, as the order did not state that the reversal was upon questions of fact, this court was constrained by section 272 of the Code to decree it to have been upon questions of law only; and as the findings of the referee were not entirely unsupported by evidence, order reversed.
Charles A. JDmison for the appellant.
A. 8. Payne for the respondents.
[MAJORITY — Rapallo, J.,]
Rapallo, J.,
reads for reversal of order of General Term and affirmance of judgment upon the report of referee.
All concur.
Ordered accordingly.