Schrenk & Co. v. Gurfein

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Schrenk & Co. v. Gurfein

140 N.Y.S. 520

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedMarch 1, 1913

StatusPublished

This text of 140 N.Y.S. 520 (Schrenk & Co. v. Gurfein) 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.

Bluebook

Schrenk & Co. v. Gurfein, 140 N.Y.S. 520 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1913).

Pincite

Opinion

BIJUR, J.

The defendant in this case was entitled to have his default opened because it had occurred through failure to accord him an adjournment while his counsel was engaged in the trial of another action. Under these circumstances, the granting of the motion upon the terms imposed was tantamount to a denial of the motion, and therefore becomes appealable.' Sutton v. Bayles, 70 Misc. Rep. 522, [521]*521127 N. Y. Supp. 432; Goldstein v. Frumkes, 74 Mise. Rep. 450, 132 N. Y. Supp. 318.

Order reversed, judgment vacated, and a new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide the event. All concur.

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

BIJUR, J.

The defendant in this case was entitled to have his default opened because it had occurred through failure to accord him an adjournment while his counsel was engaged in the trial of another action. Under these circumstances, the granting of the motion upon the terms imposed was tantamount to a denial of the motion, and therefore becomes appealable.' Sutton v. Bayles, 70 Misc. Rep. 522, [521]*521127 N. Y. Supp. 432; Goldstein v. Frumkes, 74 Mise. Rep. 450, 132 N. Y. Supp. 318.

Order reversed, judgment vacated, and a new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide the event. All concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

140 N.Y.S. 520, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/schrenk-co-v-gurfein-nyappterm-1913.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack