Lowell Adams Discount Co. v. Carter

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Lowell Adams Discount Co. v. Carter

5 Misc. 2d 562, 159 N.Y.S.2d 27, 1956 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1455

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedNovember 1, 1956

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 5 Misc. 2d 562 (Lowell Adams Discount Co. v. Carter) 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

Lowell Adams Discount Co. v. Carter, 5 Misc. 2d 562, 159 N.Y.S.2d 27, 1956 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1455 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1956).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

After the entry of judgment by plaintiff, as a result of defendant’s failure to answer, the parties entered into a written stipulation in which defendant conceded liability and agreed to settle the controversy on specific terms. The granting of defendant’s motion to open the default, long after the execution of said stipulation, was improper since the relief afforded defendant ignored the stipulation and in effect set it aside. The Municipal Court lacks jurisdiction to set aside a stipulation made between parties in settlement of a controversy (Boericke & Tafel v. Gold, 88 N. Y. S. 2d 726; Equitable Trust Co. v. MacLaire, 77 Misc. 116).

The order should be reversed, with $10 costs and, motion denied.

Eder, Heoht and Tilzer, JJ., concur.

Order reversed, etc.

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

Per Curiam.

After the entry of judgment by plaintiff, as a result of defendant’s failure to answer, the parties entered into a written stipulation in which defendant conceded liability and agreed to settle the controversy on specific terms. The granting of defendant’s motion to open the default, long after the execution of said stipulation, was improper since the relief afforded defendant ignored the stipulation and in effect set it aside. The Municipal Court lacks jurisdiction to set aside a stipulation made between parties in settlement of a controversy (Boericke & Tafel v. Gold, 88 N. Y. S. 2d 726; Equitable Trust Co. v. MacLaire, 77 Misc. 116).

The order should be reversed, with $10 costs and, motion denied.

Eder, Heoht and Tilzer, JJ., concur.

Order reversed, etc.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

5 Misc. 2d 562, 159 N.Y.S.2d 27, 1956 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1455, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lowell-adams-discount-co-v-carter-nyappterm-1956.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack