Betz v. Terminal Cab Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Betz v. Terminal Cab Corp.

239 A.D. 799

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

DecidedApril 15, 1933

StatusPublished

This text of 239 A.D. 799 (Betz v. Terminal Cab Corp.) 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

Betz v. Terminal Cab Corp., 239 A.D. 799 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1933).

Pincite

Opinion

Order denying motion to vacate judgment affirmed, with costs. In our opinion the appellant was guilty of unreasonable neglect. The commission for the deposition which was sought could have been issued and returned long before the day upon which the trial was sought to be commenced. The appeal from the judgment is dismissed, with costs. The judgment was a default judgment. The appearance of counsel before the trial was commenced and before the jury was sworn and the request for a postponement and his withdrawal from all proceedings thereupon taken did not constitute a trial from which an appeal from the judgment entered thereon may be taken. Young, Kapper, Hagarty, Carswell and Davis, JJ., concur.

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

Order denying motion to vacate judgment affirmed, with costs. In our opinion the appellant was guilty of unreasonable neglect. The commission for the deposition which was sought could have been issued and returned long before the day upon which the trial was sought to be commenced. The appeal from the judgment is dismissed, with costs. The judgment was a default judgment. The appearance of counsel before the trial was commenced and before the jury was sworn and the request for a postponement and his withdrawal from all proceedings thereupon taken did not constitute a trial from which an appeal from the judgment entered thereon may be taken. Young, Kapper, Hagarty, Carswell and Davis, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

239 A.D. 799, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/betz-v-terminal-cab-corp-nyappdiv-1933.