Guliano v. Whitenack

New York Court of Common Pleas

Guliano v. Whitenack

22 N.Y.S. 560, 3 Misc. 54, 51 N.Y. St. Rep. 768

New York Court of Common Pleas·Decided March 13, 1893·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We are clear that the learned trial judge at special term well exercised his discretion in allowing the supplemental answer. But we are of opinion that the order should have been granted on the condition of a stipulation by defendant to pay the taxable costs and disbursements to the date of the order. If the defendant will so stipulate, the order is affirmed; otherwise, it is-reversed. No costs.

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

PER CURIAM.

We are clear that the learned trial judge at special term well exercised his discretion in allowing the supplemental answer. But we are of opinion that the order should have been granted on the condition of a stipulation by defendant to pay the taxable costs and disbursements to the date of the order. If the defendant will so stipulate, the order is affirmed; otherwise, it is-reversed. No costs.

Guliano v. Whitenack, 22 N.Y.S. 560, 3 Misc. 54, 51 N.Y. St. Rep. 768 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1893).

Pincite

22 N.Y.S. 560 (Guliano v. Whitenack) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.