(a) Dissents. Every order of the appellate division determining an appeal shall state whether one or more justices dissent from the determination.
§ 5712.Content of order determining appeal.
Article 57. Appeals to the Appellate Division · Last amended 1964 · Last verified July 21, 2026
In one sentenceCPLR 5712 dictates what an Appellate Division order deciding an appeal must state: whether any justice dissented, and, when the Appellate Division reverses, modifies, or changes findings of fact, whether its determination rests on the law, the facts, or both, along with the specific findings involved.
Full Text of CPLR 5712
(b) Order of Affirmance. Whenever the appellate division, although affirming a final or interlocutory judgment or order, reverses or modifies any findings of fact, or makes new findings of fact, its order shall comply with the requirements of subdivision (c).
(c) Order of Reversal or Modification. Whenever the appellate division reverses or modifies or sets aside a determination and thereupon makes a determination, except when it reinstates a verdict, its order shall state whether its determination is upon the law, or upon the facts, or upon the law and the facts:
1. if the determination is stated to be upon the law alone, the order shall also state whether or not the findings of fact below have been affirmed; and 2. if the determination is stated to be upon the facts, or upon the law and the facts, the order shall also specify the findings of fact which are reversed or modified, and set forth any new findings of fact made by the appellate division with such particularity as was employed for the statement of the findings of fact in the court of original instance; except that the order need not specify the findings of fact which are reversed or modified nor set forth any new findings of fact if the appeal is either from a determination by the court without any statement of the findings of fact or from a judgment entered upon a general verdict without answers to interrogatories.
Plain-English Summary
An Appellate Division order doesn't just announce a winner; CPLR 5712 requires it to show its work in specific ways, largely so a later appeal to the Court of Appeals has something concrete to review.
Subdivision (a) is the simplest requirement: every order deciding an appeal has to state whether one or more justices dissented. Subdivision (b) covers affirmances that aren't pure affirmances, where the Appellate Division upholds the judgment or order overall but reverses, modifies, or adds to the findings of fact; that kind of order has to meet the same requirements as an outright reversal or modification.
Those requirements sit in subdivision (c). When the Appellate Division reverses, modifies, or sets aside a determination and enters its own, other than reinstating a verdict, its order has to say whether that determination rests on the law, the facts, or both. If it's on the law alone, the order has to say whether the findings of fact below were affirmed. If it's on the facts, or on the law and the facts, the order has to spell out which findings are reversed or modified and lay out any new findings with the same level of detail used in the court of original instance, unless the appeal came from a decision without a findings statement, or from a judgment on a general verdict with no interrogatory answers to speak of.
Frequently Asked Questions
What must an Appellate Division order state about dissents?
Whether one or more justices dissented from the determination.
What does it mean for an Appellate Division determination to be 'upon the law' versus 'upon the facts'?
It shows whether the Appellate Division's reversal or modification rests on legal error, factual findings, or both, which affects whether the order must also affirm, reverse, or restate specific findings of fact.
Does an order affirming a judgment ever need to address findings of fact?
Yes. If the Appellate Division affirms overall but reverses, modifies, or adds findings of fact along the way, CPLR 5712(b) requires the order to meet the same findings requirements as a reversal.
When does the Appellate Division not have to specify findings of fact in its order?
When the appeal came from a decision made without any findings statement, or from a judgment entered on a general verdict without answers to interrogatories.
Why does CPLR 5712 require such detail in an Appellate Division order?
So the order gives a clear record of what facts were affirmed, reversed, or newly found, which the presumptions in CPLR 5612 and any further appeal to the Court of Appeals depend on.
Advisory Committee Notes
This section is derived from CPA §§ 602 and 620. Subd (a) is taken from part of the first sentence of § 620. The requirement that the order conform to § 602 is covered by subd (c). In the absence of an indication in the order or in the opinion that one or more justices dissent, the order should be deemed unanimous. See Cohen & Karger, Powers of the New York Court of Appeals 213–14 (rev. ed. 1952).
Subd (b) uses the language of the second sentence of § 620. This subdivision, like subd (c) and § 5713, has been made complete in itself in the interest of clarity and simplicity. “Findings of fact” include determinations involving an exercise of discretion. Cohen & Karger, op. cit. supra at 528.
Subd (c) is derived from part of § 602 and operates in conjunction with subd (a) of § 5612. CPA § 602 was enacted in 1942 (Laws 1942, c. 297) upon the recommendation of the Judicial Council as a part of a revision of Court of Appeals practice which was designed to overcome specific defects. See 7 NY Jud Council Rep 479-570 (1941); 8 id. at 417–444 (1942). Its purpose was to make clear, upon a reversal or modification by the Appellate Division, whether that court passed upon any issues of fact involved and to eliminate an unjustified presumption adopted by the Court of Appeals—that a reversal upon questions of law by the Appellate Division connoted an affirmance upon the facts. See id. at 431–33; Cohen & Karger, op. cit. supra at 525–526. The section appears to have worked well (see id. at 525–565) and its provisions have been retained.
Subd (b) and (c) are “inapplicable where the trial court has determined the case upon an issue of law alone, without passing upon the issues of fact.” Cohen & Karger, op. cit. supra at 559. The word “below” has been used in place of “court of original instance” in subd (b) and (c) of this section because the determination involved may be that of an appellate court, to which former § 602 is clearly applicable. See, e.g., Winnowski v Polito, 294 NY 159, 61 NE2d 425 (1945).
When an order of the Appellate Division does not comply with the requirements of subd (b) or (c) of this section (former § 602), a party may move in the Appellate Division for a resettlement of the order without permission from the Court of Appeals even though an appeal is pending to the latter court. See Cohen & Karger, op. cit. supra at 530–31 & n. 65.
Amendment History
Add, L 1962, ch 308, eff Sept 1, 1963; amd, L 1964, ch 388, § 26, eff Sept 1, 1964.
Source & verification. Provision text, History, and Advisory
Committee Notes are reproduced verbatim from the Consolidated Laws of New York.
Last verified July 21, 2026.
· Official source
Also known as: appellate division order requirementsfindings of fact appellate division orderorder upon the law or factsdissent statement appellate division order