Dain & Dill, Inc. v. Betterton

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Dain & Dill, Inc. v. Betterton

43 A.D.2d 589, 350 N.Y.S.2d 361, 1973 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3071

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Dain & Dill, Inc. v. Betterton. Read the opinion of the Court — 39 A.D.2d 939 →

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided November 26, 1973·Published

Opinion

Appeal by Daniel L. Better-ton from an order of thé Supreme Court, Putnam County, dated May 31, 1973, which, upon said court’s own motion, vacated appellant’s demands for a jury trial and directed that the five actions consolidated for joint trial be tried by the court without a jury. Order reversed, with one bill of $20 costs and disbursements jointly against respondents appearing separately and filing separate briefs; the demands for a jury trial are restored; and actions remanded to the trial court for joint trial. On a prior appeal in these cases {Dam & Dill v. Betterton, 39 A D 2d 939) we considered and rejected the contentions now urged in support of the view that certain of the actions here involved cannot satisfactorily be tried before a jury. These cases are long, overdue for trial and the trial should therefore proceed forthwith. Hopkins, Acting P. J., Munder, Martuscello, Shapiro and Brennan, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by Daniel L. Better-ton from an order of thé Supreme Court, Putnam County, dated May 31, 1973, which, upon said court’s own motion, vacated appellant’s demands for a jury trial and directed that the five actions consolidated for joint trial be tried by the court without a jury. Order reversed, with one bill of $20 costs and disbursements jointly against respondents appearing separately and filing separate briefs; the demands for a jury trial are restored; and actions remanded to the trial court for joint trial. On a prior appeal in these cases {Dam & Dill v. Betterton, 39 A D 2d 939) we considered and rejected the contentions now urged in support of the view that certain of the actions here involved cannot satisfactorily be tried before a jury. These cases are long, overdue for trial and the trial should therefore proceed forthwith. Hopkins, Acting P. J., Munder, Martuscello, Shapiro and Brennan, JJ., concur.

Dain & Dill, Inc. v. Betterton, 43 A.D.2d 589, 350 N.Y.S.2d 361, 1973 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3071 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1973).

Pincite

43 A.D.2d 589 (Dain & Dill, Inc. v. Betterton) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.