From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Gardiner v. Schwab

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Jun 29, 1888
17 N.E. 732 (N.Y. 1888)

Summary

In Gardiner v. Schwab (110 N.Y. 650), Judge GRAY said: "As the case presented here does not contain the evidence given upon the trial, the correctness of the conclusions of law made by the referee is alone the subject for review. If they are sustained by the findings, the judgment must be sustained.

Summary of this case from R.L. Co. v. S. P.P. Co.

Opinion

Argued June 25, 1888

Decided June 29, 1888

Theodore H. Swift for appellants.

W.L. Van Denbergh for respondents.



GRAY, J., reads for affirmance.

All concur.

Judgment affirmed.


Summaries of

Gardiner v. Schwab

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Jun 29, 1888
17 N.E. 732 (N.Y. 1888)

In Gardiner v. Schwab (110 N.Y. 650), Judge GRAY said: "As the case presented here does not contain the evidence given upon the trial, the correctness of the conclusions of law made by the referee is alone the subject for review. If they are sustained by the findings, the judgment must be sustained.

Summary of this case from R.L. Co. v. S. P.P. Co.
Case details for

Gardiner v. Schwab

Case Details

Full title:LEONARD Y. GARDINER et al., Respondents, v . GABRIEL SCHWAB et al.…

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Jun 29, 1888

Citations

17 N.E. 732 (N.Y. 1888)
17 N.E. 732

Citing Cases

R.L. Co. v. S. P.P. Co.

In Murray v. Marshall ( 94 N.Y. 617), Judge FINCH adopted the obiter dictum contained in Kellogg v. Thompson,…

Knickerbocker v. Robinson

In these circumstances we think it must be assumed that the proceedings at the trial and the facts proven…