Leffler v. Beck

32 Misc. 776, 66 N.Y.S. 479
CourtCity of New York Municipal Court
DecidedOctober 15, 1900
StatusPublished

This text of 32 Misc. 776 (Leffler v. Beck) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering City of New York Municipal Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Leffler v. Beck, 32 Misc. 776, 66 N.Y.S. 479 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1900).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

It is contended on this appeal that the papers before the court on the motion were wholly insufficient to warrant [777]*777the order made, and we agree with such contention. The default sought to he opened was regularly taken at the Trial Term. On the motion the only paper used by the respondent was the affidavit of the attorney, presented in obtaining the order to show cause, and while the order recites that it is made on the pleadings, the record does not bring that before us on this appeal. No affidavit of merits was used on the motion. The order was erroneously granted and must he reversed. See Deane v. Loucks, 58 Hun, 555; 25 Misc. Rep. 635.

Present: Fitzsimons, Ch. J., Conlan and Hascall, JJ.

Order reversed, with costs.

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

Related

Danziger v. Deline
25 Misc. 635 (New York Supreme Court, 1898)
Deane v. Loucks
12 N.Y.S. 903 (New York Supreme Court, 1890)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
32 Misc. 776, 66 N.Y.S. 479, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/leffler-v-beck-nynyccityct-1900.