Luckenbach Steamship Co. v. Musso

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Luckenbach Steamship Co. v. Musso

258 A.D. 914, 16 N.Y.S.2d 378, 1939 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7564

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

DecidedDecember 19, 1939

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 258 A.D. 914 (Luckenbach Steamship Co. v. Musso) 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

Luckenbach Steamship Co. v. Musso, 258 A.D. 914, 16 N.Y.S.2d 378, 1939 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7564 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1939).

Pincite

Opinion

Action to recover damages for loss arising out of collision between defendant’s steamship and plaintiff’s pier. Appeal from an order denying a motion made by the plaintiff to vacate a stay in the action and restore the cause to the calendar, and for other relief. Order reversed on the law and facts, without costs, and the motion granted, without costs. We treat the motion as one to be relieved from a judgment taken by default. (Civ. Prac. Act, § 108.) In our opinion the appellant established that the default was suffered through inadvertence and excusable neglect and that the denial of relief by the court was an improper exercise of its discretion. Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Carswell, Taylor and Close, JJ., concur.

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

Action to recover damages for loss arising out of collision between defendant’s steamship and plaintiff’s pier. Appeal from an order denying a motion made by the plaintiff to vacate a stay in the action and restore the cause to the calendar, and for other relief. Order reversed on the law and facts, without costs, and the motion granted, without costs. We treat the motion as one to be relieved from a judgment taken by default. (Civ. Prac. Act, § 108.) In our opinion the appellant established that the default was suffered through inadvertence and excusable neglect and that the denial of relief by the court was an improper exercise of its discretion. Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Carswell, Taylor and Close, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

258 A.D. 914, 16 N.Y.S.2d 378, 1939 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7564, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/luckenbach-steamship-co-v-musso-nyappdiv-1939.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack