
    Mary E. Robinson, Appellant, v. The Chinese Charitable and Benevolent Association of the City of New York, Respondent, Impleaded with Others.
    
      Order dismissing a complaint for a failure to state a cause of action — it is not appealable.
    
    An order, made upon a trial at Special Term, dismissing a complaint on the plaintiff’s opening, upon the ground that it does not state a cause of action, is not appealable; the remedy of the aggrieved party is by an appeal from the judgment entered thereon.
    Appeal by the plaintiff, Mary E. Robinson, from an order of the ' Supreme Court, made at the New York Special Term and entered in the office of the clerk of the county of New York on the 30th day of March, 1899, dismissing the complaint upon the plaintiff’s opening upon the ground that.it did not state a cause of action.
    
      3£. E. Duffy, for the appellant.
    
      Samuel Greenbaum, for the respondent.
   Van Brunt, P. J.:

It is difficult to see how the ruling of the court upon the trial of this action can be reviewed except upon an appeal from a judgment when such judgment shall be entered. The order appealed from was a mere decision upon the trial, holding that, in view of the admissions of the plaintiff, no recovery could be had upon the complaint as it stood. Such decision cannot be reviewed upon an apjieal; but a judgment must be entered, an appeal taken from the judgment, a case made and the appeal brought up in the regular way.

We think, therefore, that the appeal must be dismissed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements.

Barrett, Rumsey, Patterson and O’Brien, JJ., concurred.

Appeal dismissed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements.  