Crescent v. Reddy

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Crescent v. Reddy

191 A.D. 909

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

DecidedMarch 15, 1920

StatusPublished

This text of 191 A.D. 909 (Crescent v. Reddy) 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

Crescent v. Reddy, 191 A.D. 909 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1920).

Pincite

Opinion

Jenks, P. J.:

If such an appeal lies, it must be from an interlocutory judgment, not an order. But there is no appeal from an interlocutory judgment of the County Court, but only from such a judgment of the Supreme Court. (See Henn v. City of Mount Vernon, 190 App. Div. 533, and cases cited.) Therefore, without now passing upon the merits of the demurrer, we dismiss this appeal, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. Rich, Blackmar, Kelly and Jayeox, JJ., concur. Appeal dismissed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements.

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

Jenks, P. J.:

If such an appeal lies, it must be from an interlocutory judgment, not an order. But there is no appeal from an interlocutory judgment of the County Court, but only from such a judgment of the Supreme Court. (See Henn v. City of Mount Vernon, 190 App. Div. 533, and cases cited.) Therefore, without now passing upon the merits of the demurrer, we dismiss this appeal, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. Rich, Blackmar, Kelly and Jayeox, JJ., concur. Appeal dismissed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

191 A.D. 909, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/crescent-v-reddy-nyappdiv-1920.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack