Rodin v. Smith

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Rodin v. Smith

281 A.D. 790, 118 N.Y.S.2d 769, 1953 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3297

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

DecidedJanuary 26, 1953

StatusPublished

This text of 281 A.D. 790 (Rodin v. Smith) 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

Rodin v. Smith, 281 A.D. 790, 118 N.Y.S.2d 769, 1953 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3297 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1953).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from an order of Special Term, Supreme Court, Ulster County, granting the motion of the plaintiff for reargument of an order theretofore entered, punishing the plaintiff for contempt of court, and abrogating the provision of that order for the payment of a $200 fine. The plaintiff had been found guilty of contempt of court for having willfully failed to appeal' for examination before trial. The order remitting the fine was well within [791]*791the discretionary power of the Special Term and we find no abuse in the exercise of its discretion. The examination should proceed at a time and place to be specified in the order to be entered herein. Order appealed from unanimously affirmed, with $10 costs to the plaintiff-respondent. Settle order on notice. Present — Foster, P. J., Bergan, Coon, Halpern and Imrie, JJ. [See post, p. 917.]

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

Appeal by the defendant from an order of Special Term, Supreme Court, Ulster County, granting the motion of the plaintiff for reargument of an order theretofore entered, punishing the plaintiff for contempt of court, and abrogating the provision of that order for the payment of a $200 fine. The plaintiff had been found guilty of contempt of court for having willfully failed to appeal' for examination before trial. The order remitting the fine was well within [791]*791the discretionary power of the Special Term and we find no abuse in the exercise of its discretion. The examination should proceed at a time and place to be specified in the order to be entered herein. Order appealed from unanimously affirmed, with $10 costs to the plaintiff-respondent. Settle order on notice. Present — Foster, P. J., Bergan, Coon, Halpern and Imrie, JJ. [See post, p. 917.]

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

281 A.D. 790, 118 N.Y.S.2d 769, 1953 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3297, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rodin-v-smith-nyappdiv-1953.