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

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

DecidedJune 16, 1975

StatusPublished

This text of 48 A.D.2d 875 (E. Tetz & Sons, Inc. v. Carriage Hill Apartment Co.) 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

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

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]*876order 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]*876order 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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

48 A.D.2d 875, 369 N.Y.S.2d 192, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10118, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/e-tetz-sons-inc-v-carriage-hill-apartment-co-nyappdiv-1975.