Schrank v. New York Hotel Statler Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Schrank v. New York Hotel Statler Co.

254 A.D. 710, 3 N.Y.S.2d 849, 1938 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7219

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

DecidedApril 22, 1938

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 254 A.D. 710 (Schrank v. New York Hotel Statler Co.) 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

Schrank v. New York Hotel Statler Co., 254 A.D. 710, 3 N.Y.S.2d 849, 1938 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7219 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1938).

Pincite

Opinion

Action by plaintiffs, here appellants, to recover of defendant, here respondent, damages (1) for personal injuries and (2) for loss of wife’s services. The plaintiffs moved for an order vacating the prior order which precluded plaintiffs from offering evidence on the trial. The motion was denied. An order was entered accordingly. Plaintiffs appealed from that order but at the same time noticed a motion for a reargument and reconsideration of the original motion upon additional facts. The motion for reargument and reconsideration was granted and upon such reconsideration the original motion was again denied by an order entered, from which no appeal has been taken. Appeal dismissed, without costs. The plaintiffs waived the right to appeal from the first order by thus renewing the motion upon additional facts. (Harris v. Brown, 93 N. Y. 390, 391.) Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Davis, Johnston and Taylor, JJ., concur.

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

Action by plaintiffs, here appellants, to recover of defendant, here respondent, damages (1) for personal injuries and (2) for loss of wife’s services. The plaintiffs moved for an order vacating the prior order which precluded plaintiffs from offering evidence on the trial. The motion was denied. An order was entered accordingly. Plaintiffs appealed from that order but at the same time noticed a motion for a reargument and reconsideration of the original motion upon additional facts. The motion for reargument and reconsideration was granted and upon such reconsideration the original motion was again denied by an order entered, from which no appeal has been taken. Appeal dismissed, without costs. The plaintiffs waived the right to appeal from the first order by thus renewing the motion upon additional facts. (Harris v. Brown, 93 N. Y. 390, 391.) Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Davis, Johnston and Taylor, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

254 A.D. 710, 3 N.Y.S.2d 849, 1938 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7219, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/schrank-v-new-york-hotel-statler-co-nyappdiv-1938.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack