Diehl v. Beck

61 A.D. 570, 70 N.Y.S. 818
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided June 15, 1901·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Pee Cueiam :

The defendant neglected to serve with his motion papers the proposed pleading'; and this,' among others, may have been the reason for the denial of the motion. 'Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. ' '

Present—’Patteeson, O’Bbien, Ingbaham, McLaughlin and Hatch, JJ.

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and. disbursements.

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

Diehl v. Beck, 61 A.D. 570, 70 N.Y.S. 818 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1901).

61 A.D. 570 (Diehl v. Beck) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Jones v. Gould
56 Misc. 328 (New York Supreme Court, 1907)