Murrell v. Graziade
This text of 130 N.Y.S. 140 (Murrell v. Graziade) 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.
Opinion
The defendant excuses his nonattendance by the affidavit of his attorney that the New York Daw Journal was not delivered at his office until 1 o’clock p. m. of the day on which the case appeared on the calendar at 9:45 a. m.
There is a serious defect in the moving papers, namely, the absence of any allegations showing a meritorious defense, or, indeed, any indication at all of what the defense may be. This omission is fatal. Harvey v. Gillies (Sup.) 117 N. Y. Supp. 204; Clews v. Peper, 112 App. Div. 430, 98 N. Y. Supp. 404.
Order reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and motion denied, with $10 costs. All concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
130 N.Y.S. 140, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/murrell-v-graziade-nyappterm-1911.