Kalvin v. Meyers

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Kalvin v. Meyers

117 N.Y.S. 141

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedMay 27, 1909

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 117 N.Y.S. 141 (Kalvin v. Meyers) 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

Kalvin v. Meyers, 117 N.Y.S. 141 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1909).

Pincite

Opinion

LEHMAN, J.

The order dismissing the complaint herein for non-prosecution was properly granted, and the order and the judgment entered thereon should be affirmed.

In view of the dismissal of the complaint, the court was correct in refusing to compel the defendants to accept' a notice of trial in the same action, and this order should be affirmed. Upon the appeal from the judgment only those intermediate orders specified in the notice of appeal come up for review as necessarily affect the final judgment. “It is only orders which, if reversed, would take away the foundation of the judgment that can.be reviewed on appeal from the judgment.” Raff v. Koster & Bial, 38 App. Div. 336, 56 N. Y. Supp. 997. The [142]*142order entered on April 10, 1906, denying the plaintiff’s motion to strike out part of defendants’ answer, in no wise affects the foundation of the judgment appealed from here, and we can, therefore, not consider its propriety at this date.

Judgment and order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. All concur.

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

LEHMAN, J.

The order dismissing the complaint herein for non-prosecution was properly granted, and the order and the judgment entered thereon should be affirmed.

In view of the dismissal of the complaint, the court was correct in refusing to compel the defendants to accept' a notice of trial in the same action, and this order should be affirmed. Upon the appeal from the judgment only those intermediate orders specified in the notice of appeal come up for review as necessarily affect the final judgment. “It is only orders which, if reversed, would take away the foundation of the judgment that can.be reviewed on appeal from the judgment.” Raff v. Koster & Bial, 38 App. Div. 336, 56 N. Y. Supp. 997. The [142]*142order entered on April 10, 1906, denying the plaintiff’s motion to strike out part of defendants’ answer, in no wise affects the foundation of the judgment appealed from here, and we can, therefore, not consider its propriety at this date.

Judgment and order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. All concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

117 N.Y.S. 141, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kalvin-v-meyers-nyappterm-1909.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack