
    Henry Saling, Respondent, against The German Savings Bank of the City of New York, Appellant.
    (Decided February 3d, 1890.)
    A stipulation, given on appeal from a judgment of the General Term of the City Court reversing a judgment and ordering a new trial, that if the judgment is affirmed judgment absolute shall be given against ap- " pellant, precludes an appeal to the Court of Appeals.
    Motion for leave to appeal to Court of Appeals.
    
      Sigismund Kaufmann, for appellant.
    
      Max Bayersdorfer, for respondent.
   Bookstaver, J.

This action was originally commenced in the City Court, and on the trial resulted in a dismissal of the complaint. An appeal was taken from the judgment of dismissal to the General Term of that court, and resulted in a reversal of the judgment and in ordering a new trial. From this order of the General Term of that court an appeal was taken by the defendant to this court, and in such appeal the defendant stipulated as follows: “And the defendant and appellant hereby assents that, if the said order of reversal so appealed from be affirmed, judgment absolute shall be rendered against defendant and appellant.” The giving of such a stipulation we think precludes an appeal to the Court of Appeals (Gordon v. Hartman, 79 N. Y. 221). But if this were not so, we think leave should not be given. The General Term of this court unanimously affirmed the order granting a new trial. There is involved in the litigation no principle of general interest, and the court of last resort has definitely passed upon the liability of savings banks and their depositors in cases similar to the present (Appelby v. Erie County Savings Bank, 62 N. Y. 12; Allen v. Williamsburgh Savings Bank, 69 N. Y. 314; Smith v. Brooklyn Savings Bank, 101 N. Y. 58).

We therefore think the leave asked for should be denied, with costs.

Bischoff, J., concurred.

Motion denied, with costs.  