Kamin v. American Express Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department · 1976 · Corporations
Corporationsaffirmedappellate procedureopinion belowSpecial Termcosts

Facts

The provided majority opinion contains no substantive factual recitation. It identifies only that there was an order and judgment of the Supreme Court, New York County, and that an appeal was taken from those rulings. The Appellate Division affirmed on the opinion of Greenfield, J., at Special Term. The court also awarded respondents $60 in costs and disbursements of the appeal.

Issue

Whether the order and judgment of the Supreme Court, New York County, should be reversed or affirmed on appeal.

Rule

When an appellate court affirms on the opinion below, it adopts the reasoning of the lower court's opinion rather than setting out an independent analysis in its own opinion.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

  • The court's holding and reasoning
  • Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
  • 10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case
Sign up free to see more →
Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.
In a contract dispute in Manhattan, the Appellate Division issues a one-sentence order stating that the Supreme Court's judgment is "affirmed on the opinion of Patel, J., at Special Term." The order adds only that the respondent is awarded costs on appeal.

If a later court wants to know the basis for the affirmance, which source supplies the controlling reasoning?

Explanation. When an appellate court affirms on the opinion below, it adopts that lower-court opinion as its reasoning instead of providing separate analysis. The brief appellate order indicates affirmance and costs, but the substantive basis comes from the incorporated lower-court opinion. (Derived from Kamin v. American Express Co. (1976).)