Fox v. Muller

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Fox v. Muller

31 Misc. 470, 64 N.Y.S. 388

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedMay 15, 1900

StatusPublished

This text of 31 Misc. 470 (Fox v. Muller) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Fox v. Muller, 31 Misc. 470, 64 N.Y.S. 388 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1900).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Guriam.

There seems to be no authority for severing an action after verdict against all the defendants. If the costs, awarded, against the defendants Muller by the interlocutory judgment, have not been collected, when the time comes to enter final judgment they may be taxed as, and included in the judgments against the Mullers. Code Civ. Pro., § 779. There is no reason why the plaintiff may not enter judgment for different sums against the several defendants. 'Section 1246 directs the clerk to docket judgments separately against each judgment debtor.

The order applied for is unnecessary, and the order denying it must be affirmed, with costs.

Present: Truak, P. J., Scott and Dugro, J J.

Order affirmed, with costs.

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

Per Guriam.

There seems to be no authority for severing an action after verdict against all the defendants. If the costs, awarded, against the defendants Muller by the interlocutory judgment, have not been collected, when the time comes to enter final judgment they may be taxed as, and included in the judgments against the Mullers. Code Civ. Pro., § 779. There is no reason why the plaintiff may not enter judgment for different sums against the several defendants. 'Section 1246 directs the clerk to docket judgments separately against each judgment debtor.

The order applied for is unnecessary, and the order denying it must be affirmed, with costs.

Present: Truak, P. J., Scott and Dugro, J J.

Order affirmed, with costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

31 Misc. 470, 64 N.Y.S. 388, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fox-v-muller-nyappterm-1900.