Simrany v. Locke

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Simrany v. Locke

256 A.D. 838, 9 N.Y.S.2d 250, 1939 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5091

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

DecidedJanuary 23, 1939

StatusPublished

This text of 256 A.D. 838 (Simrany v. Locke) 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

Simrany v. Locke, 256 A.D. 838, 9 N.Y.S.2d 250, 1939 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5091 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1939).

Pincite

Opinion

Order consolidating actions modified by striking out the words “ City Court of Yonkers ” in the second ordering paragraph and substituting therefor the following: “ County Court of Westchester County,” and as so modified affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements to appellant. Although empowered to remove to itself pending actions in other courts for consolidation with an action pending therein (Date v. Economy Cotton Goods Stores, 263 N. Y. 252), the County Court is without power to divest itself of jurisdiction and direct trial in another court of an action brought in the County Court. In the exercise of discretion, the motion of defendant to consolidate the actions in the County Court is granted. Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Davis, Adel and Taylor, JJ., concur.

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

Order consolidating actions modified by striking out the words “ City Court of Yonkers ” in the second ordering paragraph and substituting therefor the following: “ County Court of Westchester County,” and as so modified affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements to appellant. Although empowered to remove to itself pending actions in other courts for consolidation with an action pending therein (Date v. Economy Cotton Goods Stores, 263 N. Y. 252), the County Court is without power to divest itself of jurisdiction and direct trial in another court of an action brought in the County Court. In the exercise of discretion, the motion of defendant to consolidate the actions in the County Court is granted. Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Davis, Adel and Taylor, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

256 A.D. 838, 9 N.Y.S.2d 250, 1939 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5091, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/simrany-v-locke-nyappdiv-1939.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack