Gould v. Paillard Products, Inc.

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Gould v. Paillard Products, Inc.

139 A.2d 864, 1958 D.C. App. LEXIS 295

CourtDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals

DecidedMarch 31, 1958

DocketNo. 2115

StatusPublished

This text of 139 A.2d 864 (Gould v. Paillard Products, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District of Columbia Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Gould v. Paillard Products, Inc., 139 A.2d 864, 1958 D.C. App. LEXIS 295 (D.C. 1958).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was sued on a judgment of the Municipal Court of the City of New York. He defended on the ground that the New York judgment was invalid. The trial court found against appellant, denied his motion for new trial, and entered judgment against him on October 17, 1956. No^ appeal was taken from the judgment. On August 2, 1957, after appellant had been ordered to answer written interrogatories relating to his assets, he filed a motion for “dismissal” of the judgment. That motion was denied and this appeal is from its denial.

The appeal must be dismissed. Even if there be any merit in appellant’s contention regarding the invalidity of the New York judgment, it is now too late to consider it. The question could and should have been brought here by direct appeal from the local judgment entered on the foreign judgment. Time for such appeal has long passed, and the belated motion to dismiss or vacate the judgment presents no question which can be reviewed by this court. MacVey v. MacVey, D.C.Mun.App., 98 A.2d 794.

Appeal dismissed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was sued on a judgment of the Municipal Court of the City of New York. He defended on the ground that the New York judgment was invalid. The trial court found against appellant, denied his motion for new trial, and entered judgment against him on October 17, 1956. No^ appeal was taken from the judgment. On August 2, 1957, after appellant had been ordered to answer written interrogatories relating to his assets, he filed a motion for “dismissal” of the judgment. That motion was denied and this appeal is from its denial.

The appeal must be dismissed. Even if there be any merit in appellant’s contention regarding the invalidity of the New York judgment, it is now too late to consider it. The question could and should have been brought here by direct appeal from the local judgment entered on the foreign judgment. Time for such appeal has long passed, and the belated motion to dismiss or vacate the judgment presents no question which can be reviewed by this court. MacVey v. MacVey, D.C.Mun.App., 98 A.2d 794.

Appeal dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

139 A.2d 864, 1958 D.C. App. LEXIS 295, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gould-v-paillard-products-inc-dc-1958.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack