Fred Medart Manufacturing Co. v. Rafferty

243 A.D. 632
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided January 15, 1935·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Order granting plaintiff’s motion in a replevin action to permit it to offer proof of the value of chattels and upon determination of their value to resettle the judgment entered upon a stipulation or agreement of settlement, and order fixing the value of the chattels and resettling the judgment, reversed on the law, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motions denied, with ten dollars costs. The judgment was entered upon a stipulation or agreement of settlement which has not been set aside or modified. The court was without power to resettle the judgment so as to change it in matter of substance and alter its legal effect. (Herpe v. Herpe, 225 N. Y. 323.) The plaintiff is not without remedy. It may move to be relieved from its stipulation and to vacate the judgment entered thereon if it can show facts which would entitle it to such relief. (Ladd v. Stevenson, 112 N. Y. 325; Hatch v. Central National Bank, 78 id. 487.) Lazansky, P. J., Young, Carswell, Davis and Johnston, JJ., concur.

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

Fred Medart Manufacturing Co. v. Rafferty, 243 A.D. 632 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1935).

243 A.D. 632 (Fred Medart Manufacturing Co. v. Rafferty) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

First National City Bank v. Elsky
62 Misc. 2d 880 (Civil Court of the City of New York, 1970)
U. S. Auto Radiator Co. v. Meyers
36 Misc. 2d 127 (New York Supreme Court, 1962)
Gittlitz v. Lewis
29 Misc. 2d 134 (New York Supreme Court, 1961)