Unger v. Forty Second Street

The Superior Court of New York City

Unger v. Forty Second Street

6 Rob. 545

CourtThe Superior Court of New York City

DecidedJanuary 15, 1867

StatusPublished

This text of 6 Rob. 545 (Unger v. Forty Second Street) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering The Superior Court of New York City primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Unger v. Forty Second Street, 6 Rob. 545 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1867).

Pincite

Opinion

Monell, J.

This was a motion to dismiss the complaint for want of prosecution. After the service of the summons and complaint, the defendants obtained an order staying the plaintiff’s proceedings until the payment of the costs of a former suit between the parties, and extending the time to answer for twenty days after such costs should have been paid. The costs have not been paid, nor the stay of proceedings vacated, and the defendants have not answered the complaint.

A motion to dismiss, under the 27th rule of court, can only be made after an issue of fact has been joined in the [546]*546action; and the 4th subdivision of section 274 of the Code, relates to actions against several defendants,-where the plaintiff fails to proceed against the defendant or defendants served.

There being no provision in the Code or in the rules of court applicable to this motion, it must be denied.

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

Monell, J.

This was a motion to dismiss the complaint for want of prosecution. After the service of the summons and complaint, the defendants obtained an order staying the plaintiff’s proceedings until the payment of the costs of a former suit between the parties, and extending the time to answer for twenty days after such costs should have been paid. The costs have not been paid, nor the stay of proceedings vacated, and the defendants have not answered the complaint.

A motion to dismiss, under the 27th rule of court, can only be made after an issue of fact has been joined in the [546]*546action; and the 4th subdivision of section 274 of the Code, relates to actions against several defendants,-where the plaintiff fails to proceed against the defendant or defendants served.

There being no provision in the Code or in the rules of court applicable to this motion, it must be denied.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

6 Rob. 545, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/unger-v-forty-second-street-nysuperctnyc-1867.