Pinchot v. New York Elevated Railroad

49 A.D. 356
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided July 1, 1900·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam:

The appeal herein is from so much of the .order * * * entered * * * on the 27th day of February, 1900, as denies defendants’ motion to resettle the order of February 14th, 1900, by modifying the terms therein imposed.”

We assume that what the defendant seeks is a modification of the terms imposed by the original order, but no appeal is taken therefrom, and we do not think that this question can be raised by appeal from so much of a subsequent order as denies the motion for a resettlement of the original order.

The appeal accordingly should be dismissed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements.

Present —Van Brunt, P. J., Barrett, Rumsey, O’Brien and Ingraham, JJ.

Appeal dismissed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements.

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

Pinchot v. New York Elevated Railroad, 49 A.D. 356 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1900).

49 A.D. 356 (Pinchot v. New York Elevated Railroad) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Quality Fruit Wines Corp. v. Cribari
275 A.D.2d 1053 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1949)
People ex rel. Envoy Apartments, Inc. v. Miller
255 A.D. 972 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1938)
Twin Realty Corp. v. Glens Falls PortLand Cement Co.
225 A.D. 515 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1929)