Back v. First Solotwiner Sick Benefit Society

155 Misc. 585, 280 N.Y.S. 107, 1935 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1201
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York·Decided May 21, 1935·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

More than twenty days having elapsed after due entry of judgment and service of notice thereof, defendant was not entitled to an amendment or modification of judgment under section 129 of the Municipal Court Code. In addition the modification or amendment sought was not a correction for error of form or substance shown in the record itself. (Frost v. City of New York, 177 N. Y. Supp. 220.)

Order reversed, with ten dollars costs, and motion denied.

All concur; present, Hammer, Callahan and Shientag, JJ.

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

Back v. First Solotwiner Sick Benefit Society, 155 Misc. 585, 280 N.Y.S. 107, 1935 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1201 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1935).

155 Misc. 585 (Back v. First Solotwiner Sick Benefit Society) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Petrides v. Park Hill Restaurant, Inc.
265 A.D. 509 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1943)