Snedecor v. Chapel

192 A.D. 915
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided May 15, 1920·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Plaintiff was not premature in moving for judgment upon the first answer, since she moved after issue joined. (Code Civ. Proc. § 547.) A power to amend cannot be invoked to defeat such motion unless exercised by serving a new answer before the motion is heard. (Dorf v. Corsa, 163 N. Y. Supp. 602.) But service of a new answer wholly supersedes the original answer. The order thereon then becomes unimportant, save as to motion costs, and upon the hearing here these have been waived. Nothing substantial being now left, the appeal is dismissed, without costs. Jenks, P. J., Mills, Rich, Putnam and Kelly, JJ., concur.

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

Snedecor v. Chapel, 192 A.D. 915 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1920).

192 A.D. 915 (Snedecor v. Chapel) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Wrobleski v. Wakefield Homes, Inc.
46 A.D.2d 805 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1974)
Kafka v. O'Malley
22 N.W.2d 845 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1946)
Angelini v. Merchants Despatch Transportation Co.
253 A.D. 506 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1938)