Smith v. Buckley

152 Misc. 302, 273 N.Y.S. 330, 1934 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1491
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York·Decided July 12, 1934·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

While there is a recital in the judgment in the prior action that judgment was rendered in favor of defendant against plaintiff after motion to dismiss at the end of plaintiff’s case, the actual adjudication is that defendant recover from plaintiff thirty-two dollars, costs and disbursements. It is undisputed that the prior dismissal was due to the absence of a material witness for the plaintiff; presumptively the dismissal was without prejudice (Mauro v. Cooper, 181 App. Div. 884); and the denial of plaintiff’s motion to correct the record of the prior trial does not defeat the cause of action established herein.

Judgment reversed, with thirty dollars costs, and judgment directed for the plaintiff for the amount demanded in the complaint, with costs.

All concur; present, Callahan, Frankenthaler and Shientag, JJ.

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

Smith v. Buckley, 152 Misc. 302, 273 N.Y.S. 330, 1934 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1491 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1934).

152 Misc. 302 (Smith v. Buckley) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Mauro v. Cooper
181 A.D. 884 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1917)