Abramson v. Held

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Abramson v. Held

263 A.D. 871, 32 N.Y.S.2d 274, 1942 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7148

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedJanuary 5, 1942

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 263 A.D. 871 (Abramson v. Held) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Abramson v. Held, 263 A.D. 871, 32 N.Y.S.2d 274, 1942 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7148 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1942).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action brought to recover a money judgment fdr the amount due and unpaid under a chattel mortgage, and for other equitable relief, order granting plaintiff’s motion for leave to enter judgment against appellants on default, and denying appellants’ cross-motion to vacate their default and for leave to answer, reversed on the law, without costs, plaintiff’s motion denied, without costs, and appellants’ cross-motion granted, with leave to serve theh answer within ten days from the entry of the order hereon upon the payment of twenty-five dollars costs; otherwise, order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. There is evidence in the record, at least sufficient to raise an issue, as to whether some of the mortgaged chattels have been placed beyond the plaintiff’s reach. Under these circumstances, the plaintiff would not be entitled to a money judgment. (Sani-Porcelain Enamel Products, Inc., v. Bender Store Fixture Co., Inc., 251 App. Div. 726; Swift & Co., Inc., v. Cohen, 256 id. 996.) Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Carswell, Taylor and Close, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

In an action brought to recover a money judgment fdr the amount due and unpaid under a chattel mortgage, and for other equitable relief, order granting plaintiff’s motion for leave to enter judgment against appellants on default, and denying appellants’ cross-motion to vacate their default and for leave to answer, reversed on the law, without costs, plaintiff’s motion denied, without costs, and appellants’ cross-motion granted, with leave to serve theh answer within ten days from the entry of the order hereon upon the payment of twenty-five dollars costs; otherwise, order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. There is evidence in the record, at least sufficient to raise an issue, as to whether some of the mortgaged chattels have been placed beyond the plaintiff’s reach. Under these circumstances, the plaintiff would not be entitled to a money judgment. (Sani-Porcelain Enamel Products, Inc., v. Bender Store Fixture Co., Inc., 251 App. Div. 726; Swift & Co., Inc., v. Cohen, 256 id. 996.) Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Carswell, Taylor and Close, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

263 A.D. 871, 32 N.Y.S.2d 274, 1942 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7148, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/abramson-v-held-nyappdiv-1942.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack