Cammarata v. Conley

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Cammarata v. Conley

13 Misc. 2d 349, 179 N.Y.S.2d 923, 1958 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 3097

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedJune 17, 1958

StatusPublished

This text of 13 Misc. 2d 349 (Cammarata v. Conley) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Cammarata v. Conley, 13 Misc. 2d 349, 179 N.Y.S.2d 923, 1958 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 3097 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1958).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The action against the defendant Swartz, as stakeholder, was properly joined with the action against defendant Conley (Civ. Prae. Act, § 258) and he was properly before the court as a conditionally necessary party (Civ. Prae. Act, § 193). This defendant, if so advised, may apply for appropriate relief under the provisions of section 285 of the Civil Practice Act.

[350]*350The judgment should he unanimously reversed on the law and facts, and order dated December 30, 1957 modified to the extent of denying defendant Swartz’ motion for summary judgment, and as so modified affirmed, without costs on this appeal to either party. Appeal from order of February 26, 1958 denying plaintiff’s motion to vacate the judgment dismissed as academic. Order dated February 26,1958 granting leave to defendant Conley to file jury demand nunc pro tunc affirmed, without costs.

Concur — Pette, Hart and Brown, JJ.

Judgment reversed, etc.

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

Per Curiam.

The action against the defendant Swartz, as stakeholder, was properly joined with the action against defendant Conley (Civ. Prae. Act, § 258) and he was properly before the court as a conditionally necessary party (Civ. Prae. Act, § 193). This defendant, if so advised, may apply for appropriate relief under the provisions of section 285 of the Civil Practice Act.

[350]*350The judgment should he unanimously reversed on the law and facts, and order dated December 30, 1957 modified to the extent of denying defendant Swartz’ motion for summary judgment, and as so modified affirmed, without costs on this appeal to either party. Appeal from order of February 26, 1958 denying plaintiff’s motion to vacate the judgment dismissed as academic. Order dated February 26,1958 granting leave to defendant Conley to file jury demand nunc pro tunc affirmed, without costs.

Concur — Pette, Hart and Brown, JJ.

Judgment reversed, etc.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

13 Misc. 2d 349, 179 N.Y.S.2d 923, 1958 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 3097, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cammarata-v-conley-nyappterm-1958.