First Trust & Deposit Co. v. Dent

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

First Trust & Deposit Co. v. Dent

263 A.D. 1059, 34 N.Y.S.2d 283, 1942 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8029

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

DecidedMarch 11, 1942

StatusPublished

This text of 263 A.D. 1059 (First Trust & Deposit Co. v. Dent) 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

First Trust & Deposit Co. v. Dent, 263 A.D. 1059, 34 N.Y.S.2d 283, 1942 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8029 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1942).

Pincite

Opinion

Order affirmed, without costs of this appeal to either party. Memorandum: We think that the application for an additional allowance was properly denied. The work for which an additional allowance was sought was occasioned by the defendant’s motion for summary judgment. The plaintiff should not be penalized for interposing a defense to that motion, which defense, as we have held on the appeal from the order granting the motion for summary judgment, raised a triable issue of fact. Our affirmance of the order appealed from is not to be construed as in any way affecting the defendant’s right to move for an additional allowance after the trial and disposition of the action itself. On the merits of that question, we express no opinion. All concur. (The order denies defendant’s motion for an additional allowance of costs.) Present — Crosby, P. J., Cunningham, Taylor, Dowling and Harris, JJ.

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

Order affirmed, without costs of this appeal to either party. Memorandum: We think that the application for an additional allowance was properly denied. The work for which an additional allowance was sought was occasioned by the defendant’s motion for summary judgment. The plaintiff should not be penalized for interposing a defense to that motion, which defense, as we have held on the appeal from the order granting the motion for summary judgment, raised a triable issue of fact. Our affirmance of the order appealed from is not to be construed as in any way affecting the defendant’s right to move for an additional allowance after the trial and disposition of the action itself. On the merits of that question, we express no opinion. All concur. (The order denies defendant’s motion for an additional allowance of costs.) Present — Crosby, P. J., Cunningham, Taylor, Dowling and Harris, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

263 A.D. 1059, 34 N.Y.S.2d 283, 1942 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8029, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/first-trust-deposit-co-v-dent-nyappdiv-1942.