Loog v. Mace

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Loog v. Mace

119 N.Y.S. 182

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedNovember 12, 1909

StatusPublished

This text of 119 N.Y.S. 182 (Loog v. Mace) 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

Loog v. Mace, 119 N.Y.S. 182 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1909).

Pincite

Opinion

LEHMAN, J.

The defendant having brought himself within the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure and the General Rules of Practice, which justify the court in dismissing the complaint for failure to prosecute where younger issues have been tried, no excuse having been offered, for the delay, the motion should have been granted. Me[183]*183Grath v. Murtha & Schmohl Co., 128 App. Div. 278, 112 N. Y. Supp. 679.

The order should therefore be reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and the motion granted, with $10 costs in the court below. All concur.

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

LEHMAN, J.

The defendant having brought himself within the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure and the General Rules of Practice, which justify the court in dismissing the complaint for failure to prosecute where younger issues have been tried, no excuse having been offered, for the delay, the motion should have been granted. Me[183]*183Grath v. Murtha & Schmohl Co., 128 App. Div. 278, 112 N. Y. Supp. 679.

The order should therefore be reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and the motion granted, with $10 costs in the court below. All concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

119 N.Y.S. 182, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/loog-v-mace-nyappterm-1909.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack