Stievelman v. Donnenfeld Coal Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Stievelman v. Donnenfeld Coal Co.

248 A.D. 469, 290 N.Y.S. 725, 1936 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6173

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided October 30, 1936·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The order should be reversed, with twenty dollars costs and disbursements, and the motion denied, with ten dollars costs. A motion for a new trial on exceptions could not be heard in the first instance by the Appellate Division after it had been heard and denied by the trial court. (Babad v. Colton Dental Association, 150 App. Div. 561; Starbuck v. Smith, 173 id. 954; Oglesby v. Massachusetts Accident Co., 212 id. 886.)

Present—■ Martin, P. J., McAvoy, Untermyer, Dore and Cohn, JJ.

Order unanimously reversed, with twenty dollars costs and disbursements, and the motion denied, with ten dollars costs.

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

Per Curiam.

The order should be reversed, with twenty dollars costs and disbursements, and the motion denied, with ten dollars costs. A motion for a new trial on exceptions could not be heard in the first instance by the Appellate Division after it had been heard and denied by the trial court. (Babad v. Colton Dental Association, 150 App. Div. 561; Starbuck v. Smith, 173 id. 954; Oglesby v. Massachusetts Accident Co., 212 id. 886.)

Present—■ Martin, P. J., McAvoy, Untermyer, Dore and Cohn, JJ.

Order unanimously reversed, with twenty dollars costs and disbursements, and the motion denied, with ten dollars costs.

Stievelman v. Donnenfeld Coal Co., 248 A.D. 469, 290 N.Y.S. 725, 1936 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6173 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1936).

Pincite

248 A.D. 469 (Stievelman v. Donnenfeld Coal Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related