
    SUPREME COURT.
    Siney agt. The New York Consolidated Stage Co. and Augustus Schell.
    
      An order of a judge appointing a receiver is not appealable. Neither is the order •of a judge substituting one receiver in place of another appealable.
    
      New York General Term,
    February, 1865.
    
      Before Ingraham, P. J., Clerke and Sutherland, Justices.
    
    Appeal from an order of a judge substituting and appointing one receiver in place of another.
    C. A. Rappallo and Vat. E. Allen, for defendants and appellants.
    
    A. R. Lawrence Jr. and H. W. Robinson, for Smith Sf Kerr.
    
   By the court, Clerke, J.

It is not neeessaryto consider whether ICerr & Smith have a right to he heard on this appeal, both the plaintiff and defendants being alike dissatisfied with the order of the special term, have appealed. They bring the matter to the cognizance of'the general term, and if it is appealable at all, the court has entire control of the matter on appeal. But this is not an appealable order. Before tlie person who was in the first instance appointed receiver entered on his duties, and indeed before the appointment was consummated by the filing of the requisite bond, the judge in the exercise of the same discretion which induced him to make the first nomination, reconsidered his action, revoked that nomination, and substituted another person. It is of no consequence how or where he received any information which induced him to make the substitution. We think he exercised a discretion which cannot be controlled by us.

The appeal should he dismissed.  