Hyperlawhypertext legal database Mattiaccio v. Illinois Surety Co. 139 N.Y.S. 980

← Cases

Mattiaccio v. Illinois Surety Co.

139 N.Y.S. 980 Court Argued January term, 1913, before SEABURY, LEHMAN, and PAGE, JJ. Decision date 1913-02-07 English

Contents

Majority

p. 980
MATTIACCIO v. ILLINOIS SURETY CO.
(Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department.
February 7, 1913.)

Headnote

Tbial (§ 394[1] )—Findings of Fact—Conclusions of Law.
A judgment will be reversed, where the trial court does not comply with Code Civ. Proc. § 1022, providing that the decision must state separately the facts found and the conclusions of law.
[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Trial, Cent. Dig. §§ 924-926; Dec. Dig. § 394.*]
Appeal from City Court of New York, Trial Term.
Action by Antonio Mattiaccio against the Illinois Surety Company. From judgment for plaintiff, and denial of new trial, defendant appeals.
Reversed, and new trial granted.
Argued January term, 1913, before SEABURY, LEHMAN, and PAGE, JJ.
Nelson L. Keach, of New York City, for appellant.
Anthony J. Romagna, of New York City, for respondent.

It is conceded that no decision containing findings of fact and conclusions of' law has been filed pursuant to section 1022 of the Code of Civil Procedure for which reason the judgment must

p. 981
be reversed. Wander v. Wander, 111 App. Div. 189 , 97 N. Y. Supp. 586 .

Under the circumstances it will be necessary in this case to order a new trial, with costs to appellant to abide the event.