Mannina v. Mannina

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Mannina v. Mannina

245 A.D. 823

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

DecidedJuly 15, 1935

StatusPublished

This text of 245 A.D. 823 (Mannina v. Mannina) 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

Mannina v. Mannina, 245 A.D. 823 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1935).

Pincite

Opinion

Order exonerating the appellants as bail from further liability accruing on and after March 11, 1935, modified by providing that such exoneration be without limitation, but on condition that appellants pay the plaintiff’s costs and expenses incurred after the return of the execution against the person (Civ. Prac. Act, § 875), and as so modified affirmed, in so far as appealed from, without costs. We are of opinion that the surrender of the defendant was timely and exoneration of the bail was mandatory. (Civ. Prac. Act, §§ 865, 875.) Although the failure of the appellants to answer does not affect the timeliness of the surrender and they are entitled to an order of exoneration, whether or not that defense may be invoked is dependent upon the determination of an application to open the default, as to the merits of which this appeal is not concerned and as to which we express no opinion. Lazansky, P. J., Young, Hagarty, Carswell and Scudder, JJ., concur.

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

Order exonerating the appellants as bail from further liability accruing on and after March 11, 1935, modified by providing that such exoneration be without limitation, but on condition that appellants pay the plaintiff’s costs and expenses incurred after the return of the execution against the person (Civ. Prac. Act, § 875), and as so modified affirmed, in so far as appealed from, without costs. We are of opinion that the surrender of the defendant was timely and exoneration of the bail was mandatory. (Civ. Prac. Act, §§ 865, 875.) Although the failure of the appellants to answer does not affect the timeliness of the surrender and they are entitled to an order of exoneration, whether or not that defense may be invoked is dependent upon the determination of an application to open the default, as to the merits of which this appeal is not concerned and as to which we express no opinion. Lazansky, P. J., Young, Hagarty, Carswell and Scudder, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

245 A.D. 823, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mannina-v-mannina-nyappdiv-1935.