Beebe v. Nassau Show Case Co.

41 A.D. 456, 58 N.Y.S. 769
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJune 15, 1899
StatusPublished
Cited by9 cases

This text of 41 A.D. 456 (Beebe v. Nassau Show Case Co.) 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
Beebe v. Nassau Show Case Co., 41 A.D. 456, 58 N.Y.S. 769 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1899).

Opinion

Per Curiam :

The defendant moved, upon affidavits excusing his default, to have 'the judgment entered in the action set aside. The plaintiff opposed the motion upon affidavits, and if we were authorized to review the question, we should have no hesitancy in agreeing with the disposition of the case made by the court below. The order, however, is not appealable. The practice in these cases is regulated by statute, and there must be statutory authority for an appeal, or no jurisdiction is conferred upon an appellate tribunal to review the same. (Jacobs v. Zeltner, 9 Misc. Rep. 455.) The defendant is not aided by section 1367 of the Greater New York charter (Laws of 3897, ■chap. 378), or by section 1367 of chapter 410 of the Laws of 1882, -as amended by the Laws of 1896, chapter 748, made applicable to the Municipal Court of the city of New York by section 1369 of the •Greater New York charter. Therein is provided a right of appeal from an order opening a default, and it is required that such order shall recite the grounds upon which the same was granted. But no -•authority exists, giving the right of appeal from an order which ■denies a motion to open a default. Under such circumstances the ■only remedy of the party is by an appeal from the judgment, as provided in section 3064 of the Code of Civil Procedure. (Kellock v. Dickinson, 5 App. Div. 515.) By virtue of the provisions of ■section 1367, Greater New York charter, the article of the Code in which the above section is found is made applicable to appeals from the Municipal Court. The practice in this respect is correctly set forth in Campbell v. Lumley (24 Misc. Rep. 196).

It follows that the appeal should be dismissed.

All concurred.

Appeal dismissed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements.

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

Related

Nolte v. Seymour
127 A.D. 178 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1908)
Leavitt v. Epstein
86 N.Y.S. 208 (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 1904)
Schrenkeisen v. Kroll
85 N.Y.S. 1072 (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 1904)
Long Branch Pier Co. v. Crossley
40 Misc. 249 (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 1903)
Johnson v. Manning
75 A.D. 285 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1902)
Savino v. Metropolitan Street Railway Co.
60 N.Y.S. 476 (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 1899)
Salvino v. Metropolitan Street Railway Co.
29 Misc. 746 (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 1899)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
41 A.D. 456, 58 N.Y.S. 769, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/beebe-v-nassau-show-case-co-nyappdiv-1899.