Jandorf v. Smith

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Jandorf v. Smith

222 A.D. 532, 226 N.Y.S. 835, 1928 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8107

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

DecidedJanuary 11, 1928

StatusPublished

This text of 222 A.D. 532 (Jandorf v. Smith) 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

Jandorf v. Smith, 222 A.D. 532, 226 N.Y.S. 835, 1928 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8107 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1928).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The reference provided for in the interlocutory decree was not to hear, try and determine. It was an incidental reference to ascertain certain facts, “ to the end that upon the coming in and the confirmation of such report a final judgment may be entered.” The ordinary practice under the circumstances here would have been to move at Special Term for the confirmation of the report and for final judgment and at the same time for an extra allowance. The point of practice, however, is immaterial since we are of the opinion that the case was not difficult and extraordinary within the rigid rule of this department. (Wende v. Board of Supervisors, 206 App. Div. 732, and authorities cited; Block v. Amsden, 207 id. 883.)

The order should be reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and the motion denied, with ten dollars costs.

All concur. Present — Hubbs, P. J., Clark, Sears, Crouch and Sawyer, JJ.

Order reversed, ■ with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion denied, with ten dollars costs.

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

Per Curiam.

The reference provided for in the interlocutory decree was not to hear, try and determine. It was an incidental reference to ascertain certain facts, “ to the end that upon the coming in and the confirmation of such report a final judgment may be entered.” The ordinary practice under the circumstances here would have been to move at Special Term for the confirmation of the report and for final judgment and at the same time for an extra allowance. The point of practice, however, is immaterial since we are of the opinion that the case was not difficult and extraordinary within the rigid rule of this department. (Wende v. Board of Supervisors, 206 App. Div. 732, and authorities cited; Block v. Amsden, 207 id. 883.)

The order should be reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and the motion denied, with ten dollars costs.

All concur. Present — Hubbs, P. J., Clark, Sears, Crouch and Sawyer, JJ.

Order reversed, ■ with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion denied, with ten dollars costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

222 A.D. 532, 226 N.Y.S. 835, 1928 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8107, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jandorf-v-smith-nyappdiv-1928.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack