Reeck v. Royfe

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Reeck v. Royfe

125 Misc. 825, 211 N.Y.S. 587, 1925 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 979

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York·Decided April 22, 1925·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam:

Appeal dismissed, but as respondents neither appeared nor submitted a brief, no costs are allowed.

The order is not appealable. The fact that leave to appeal was granted by the court below does not give this court jurisdiction. It can obtain jurisdiction through the granting of leave to appeal only in the certain cases that are specified. (See Mun. Ct. Code, § 154, subd. 7, since amd. by Laws of 1925, chap. 637.) The motion should have been granted. (See Wilson v. Simpson, 84 N. Y. 674; Drake v. Hodgson, 119 Misc. 288; affd., 203 App. Div. 856.)

Present: Cfopsey, Lazansey and MacCrate, JJ.

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

Per Curiam:

Appeal dismissed, but as respondents neither appeared nor submitted a brief, no costs are allowed.

The order is not appealable. The fact that leave to appeal was granted by the court below does not give this court jurisdiction. It can obtain jurisdiction through the granting of leave to appeal only in the certain cases that are specified. (See Mun. Ct. Code, § 154, subd. 7, since amd. by Laws of 1925, chap. 637.) The motion should have been granted. (See Wilson v. Simpson, 84 N. Y. 674; Drake v. Hodgson, 119 Misc. 288; affd., 203 App. Div. 856.)

Present: Cfopsey, Lazansey and MacCrate, JJ.

Reeck v. Royfe, 125 Misc. 825, 211 N.Y.S. 587, 1925 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 979 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1925).

Pincite

125 Misc. 825 (Reeck v. Royfe) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related