E. Tetz & Sons, Inc. v. Carriage Hill Apartment Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

E. Tetz & Sons, Inc. v. Carriage Hill Apartment Co.

48 A.D.2d 875, 369 N.Y.S.2d 192, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10118

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided June 16, 1975·Published

Opinion

In an action to recover for goods sold and delivered, defendant appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Orange County, dated January 2, 1975, as, in granting defendant’s motion to vacate a default judgment, provided that defendant post a bond in the amount of the judgment, with the judgment to stand as security pending the outcome of the action. Order modified, in' the exercise of discretion, by deleting therefrom the provision that the judgment stand as security. As so modified, [876] order affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs. Under the circumstances, requiring defendant to post a bond in the amount of the judgment is appropriate to adequately protect plaintiffs rights. In light of this protection, the further requirement that the judgment stand as security is unnecessary. Rabin, Acting P. J., Hopkins, Martuscello, Cohalan and Munder, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to recover for goods sold and delivered, defendant appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Orange County, dated January 2, 1975, as, in granting defendant’s motion to vacate a default judgment, provided that defendant post a bond in the amount of the judgment, with the judgment to stand as security pending the outcome of the action. Order modified, in' the exercise of discretion, by deleting therefrom the provision that the judgment stand as security. As so modified, [876] order affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs. Under the circumstances, requiring defendant to post a bond in the amount of the judgment is appropriate to adequately protect plaintiffs rights. In light of this protection, the further requirement that the judgment stand as security is unnecessary. Rabin, Acting P. J., Hopkins, Martuscello, Cohalan and Munder, JJ., concur.

E. Tetz & Sons, Inc. v. Carriage Hill Apartment Co., 48 A.D.2d 875, 369 N.Y.S.2d 192, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10118 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1975).

Pincite

48 A.D.2d 875 (E. Tetz & Sons, Inc. v. Carriage Hill Apartment Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.