Kelly v. Eichacker

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Kelly v. Eichacker

250 A.D. 733, 293 N.Y.S. 489, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8663

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

DecidedFebruary 19, 1937

StatusPublished

This text of 250 A.D. 733 (Kelly v. Eichacker) 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

Kelly v. Eichacker, 250 A.D. 733, 293 N.Y.S. 489, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8663 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1937).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action (1) to recover damages for the conversion of chattels and (2) to recover rental value of such chattels prior to conversion, order granting motion of defendant to open his default reversed on the law and the facts, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion denied, with ten dollars costs. The moving papers contained no factual showing that there was a defense to either cause of action, and the conduct of the defendant, after the default and before the motion to open it, in removing his property beyond the reach of the plaintiff, his creditor, shows bad faith warranting the denial of the motion in the exercise of sound discretion. Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Davis, Adel and Taylor, JJ., concur.

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

In an action (1) to recover damages for the conversion of chattels and (2) to recover rental value of such chattels prior to conversion, order granting motion of defendant to open his default reversed on the law and the facts, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion denied, with ten dollars costs. The moving papers contained no factual showing that there was a defense to either cause of action, and the conduct of the defendant, after the default and before the motion to open it, in removing his property beyond the reach of the plaintiff, his creditor, shows bad faith warranting the denial of the motion in the exercise of sound discretion. Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Davis, Adel and Taylor, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

250 A.D. 733, 293 N.Y.S. 489, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8663, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kelly-v-eichacker-nyappdiv-1937.