Smith v. Kent
This text of 259 A.D. 117 (Smith v. Kent) 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.
Opinion
Upon this motion to vacate a judgment, entered upon defendant’s confession of judgment alleged to be void for lack of consideration and for fraud, the sharply contested issues of fact should not be resolved upon affidavits. The motion should have been denied without prejudice to a plenary action to vacate the judgment. In such action the court may afford adequate protection to the parties. (Cf. 15 R. C. L. § 106, p. 659.)
The order should be reversed, with twenty dollars costs and disbursements, and the motion denied, without prejudice to the maintenance of a plenary action.
Present — Martin, P. J., Townley, Dore, Cohn and Callahan, JJ.
Order unanimously reversed, with twenty dollars costs and disbursements, and motion denied, without prejudice to the maintenance of a plenary action to vacate judgment.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
259 A.D. 117, 18 N.Y.S.2d 262, 1940 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6064, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smith-v-kent-nyappdiv-1940.