Lackomowitz v. Bates

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Lackomowitz v. Bates

168 A.D. 968, 153 N.Y.S. 1123

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

DecidedMay 15, 1915

StatusPublished

This text of 168 A.D. 968 (Lackomowitz v. Bates) 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

Lackomowitz v. Bates, 168 A.D. 968, 153 N.Y.S. 1123 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1915).

Pincite

Opinion

The parties hereto having stipulated in open court that this ease may be disposed of by a court of four, the decision is as follows: Judgment and .order, in so far as they affect defendant McGonigle, affirmed, without costs; in so far as they affect the defendants Bates, reversed and new trial granted, with costs against appellants Bates to abide the event. (See Code Civ. Proc. § 507; Ferguson v. Crawford, 70 N. Y. 253; Sinnott v. Sanan, 156 App. Div. 323.) There is no pleading nor proof which makes it proper for us to pass upon the effect of a motion asserted to have been made in the Municipal Court to set aside the judgment on the ground that the defendant in that action was not served with summons; therefore, that question is left undetermined by this appeal. Jenks, P. J., Thomas, Stapleton and Rich, JJ., concurred.

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

The parties hereto having stipulated in open court that this ease may be disposed of by a court of four, the decision is as follows: Judgment and .order, in so far as they affect defendant McGonigle, affirmed, without costs; in so far as they affect the defendants Bates, reversed and new trial granted, with costs against appellants Bates to abide the event. (See Code Civ. Proc. § 507; Ferguson v. Crawford, 70 N. Y. 253; Sinnott v. Sanan, 156 App. Div. 323.) There is no pleading nor proof which makes it proper for us to pass upon the effect of a motion asserted to have been made in the Municipal Court to set aside the judgment on the ground that the defendant in that action was not served with summons; therefore, that question is left undetermined by this appeal. Jenks, P. J., Thomas, Stapleton and Rich, JJ., concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

168 A.D. 968, 153 N.Y.S. 1123, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lackomowitz-v-bates-nyappdiv-1915.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack