Smith v. Featherly

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Smith v. Featherly

242 A.D. 886, 275 N.Y.S. 256

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

DecidedNovember 15, 1934

StatusPublished

This text of 242 A.D. 886 (Smith v. Featherly) 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

Smith v. Featherly, 242 A.D. 886, 275 N.Y.S. 256 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1934).

Pincite

Opinion

Order reversed on the law, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion denied, with ten dollars costs. The County Court may not, on motion, set aside a voidable judgment of the City Court. The remedy was by appeal. (Mantha Co., Inc., v. Pirseh & Sons Co., 222 App. Div. 440; Handshaw v. Arthur, 9 id. 175; affd,, 161 N. Y. 664; East Syracuse Motor Car Co. v. Tuttle, 230 App. Div, 872.) Hill, P. J., Rhodes, McNamee, Crapser and Heffernan, JJ., concur.

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

Order reversed on the law, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion denied, with ten dollars costs. The County Court may not, on motion, set aside a voidable judgment of the City Court. The remedy was by appeal. (Mantha Co., Inc., v. Pirseh & Sons Co., 222 App. Div. 440; Handshaw v. Arthur, 9 id. 175; affd,, 161 N. Y. 664; East Syracuse Motor Car Co. v. Tuttle, 230 App. Div, 872.) Hill, P. J., Rhodes, McNamee, Crapser and Heffernan, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

242 A.D. 886, 275 N.Y.S. 256, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smith-v-featherly-nyappdiv-1934.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack