Whitney v. Chesbro

244 A.D. 594, 280 N.Y.S. 138, 1935 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5880
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided May 8, 1935·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The judgment was rendered in an action in which the court had jurisdiction of the parties and of the subject-matter. The judgment, although an unusual one, seems equitable. Far from appealing from the judgment, the moving parties, who now ask that the judgment be vacated and set aside, acted under it to secure an advantage awarded to them by the judgment. This fact alone should deprive them of the privilege of vacating the judgment. But it is well settled that, where the court has jurisdie[595] tion, its judgment cannot be attacked for error by motion. An appeal is the appropriate remedy. (Fisher v. Hepburn, 48 N. Y. 41.)

All concur. Present — Sears, P. J., Taylor, Edgcomb, Crosby and Lewis, JJ.

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements.

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

Whitney v. Chesbro, 244 A.D. 594, 280 N.Y.S. 138, 1935 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5880 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1935).

244 A.D. 594 (Whitney v. Chesbro) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Tomoser v. Hegyi
1 A.D.2d 759 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1955)
Miller v. Miller
38 N.W.2d 35 (North Dakota Supreme Court, 1949)
Harlem Savings Bank v. Salvador Realty Corp.
175 Misc. 504 (New York Supreme Court, 1940)