From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mackenzie v. Marine Midland Trust Co. of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 1, 1934
243 App. Div. 563 (N.Y. App. Div. 1934)

Opinion

December, 1934.


Order denying appellant's motion to disapprove the referee's report, dated April 14, 1934, reversed upon the law, without costs, and matter remitted to the Special Term to pass upon the referee's report, considering said report as an aid to the court in determining the motion made by the receiver to settle her accounts. ( Baff v. Elias, 152 App. Div. 226.) In our opinion, the court was without power to refer the matter in question to the official referee to hear and determine. The order should have been made to hear and report, and we so consider it in making this decision. The appeal from the order of reference, dated November 15, 1933, is dismissed, this order having been entered on the appellant's motion. ( Gasteiger v. Gasteiger, No. 2, 222 App. Div. 752.) The appeal from the order denying resettlement of the order of reference is likewise dismissed as not appealable. ( Bergin v. Anderson, 216 App. Div. 844.) Young, Carswell and Tompkins, JJ., concur; Lazansky, P.J., dissents and votes to affirm as to first mentioned order on the ground that the entry of the order of November 15, 1933, was on appellant's motion. This, in effect, was a consent to the order of reference to hear and determine. Therefore, that order should not be considered in any other aspect; concur as to two other appeals. Scudder, J., not voting.


Summaries of

Mackenzie v. Marine Midland Trust Co. of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 1, 1934
243 App. Div. 563 (N.Y. App. Div. 1934)
Case details for

Mackenzie v. Marine Midland Trust Co. of New York

Case Details

Full title:ETHEL MACKENZIE, Respondent, v. THE MARINE MIDLAND TRUST COMPANY OF NEW…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Dec 1, 1934

Citations

243 App. Div. 563 (N.Y. App. Div. 1934)

Citing Cases

MATTER OF MEYROWITZ

The contention that the original order was void and that it could not be corrected nunc pro tunc without…

In re Mandell

A discussion on the merits is unnecessary, in view of what I have hereinbefore shown, but, in passing, I…