Slater v. Berger

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Slater v. Berger

50 A.D.2d 945, 378 N.Y.S.2d 644, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11886

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

DecidedDecember 31, 1975

StatusPublished

This text of 50 A.D.2d 945 (Slater v. Berger) 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

Slater v. Berger, 50 A.D.2d 945, 378 N.Y.S.2d 644, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11886 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

— In an action inter alia for an accounting, the appeal is from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated July 17, 1975, which conditionally denied a motion to vacate the note of issue and to strike the action from the Trial Calendar. Order affirmed, without costs. Although the note of issue and statement of readiness were filed prematurely, it appears that the case is now ready for trial and should proceed forthwith. The issue as to defendant’s right to a jury trial was not raised at Special Term; it has been raised in the first instance on appeal. Notwithstanding such fact, we find that the relief sought lies in equity and that a trial by jury is thus not warranted (CPLR 4101). Hopkins, Acting P. J., Martuscello, Cohalan, Brennan and Munder, JJ., concur.

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

— In an action inter alia for an accounting, the appeal is from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated July 17, 1975, which conditionally denied a motion to vacate the note of issue and to strike the action from the Trial Calendar. Order affirmed, without costs. Although the note of issue and statement of readiness were filed prematurely, it appears that the case is now ready for trial and should proceed forthwith. The issue as to defendant’s right to a jury trial was not raised at Special Term; it has been raised in the first instance on appeal. Notwithstanding such fact, we find that the relief sought lies in equity and that a trial by jury is thus not warranted (CPLR 4101). Hopkins, Acting P. J., Martuscello, Cohalan, Brennan and Munder, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

50 A.D.2d 945, 378 N.Y.S.2d 644, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11886, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/slater-v-berger-nyappdiv-1975.