Wiederman v. Glass
This text of 34 Misc. 828 (Wiederman v. Glass) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering City of New York Municipal Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The court below exercised a wise discretion in mailing the order from which appeal is taken.
At best the proposed supplemental answer was of doubtful significance, and application would, we think, have presented no additionally strengthened or substantial defense and no additional tesmony could be introduced in its support. It is possible, too, that, beside this consideration, the very patent laches of defendant in moving had its due effect in determining a denial of unusual relief.
Order appealed from should be affirmed, with costs and.disbursements.
O’Dwyer, J., concurs.
Order affirmed, with costs.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
34 Misc. 828, 71 N.Y.S. 1151, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wiederman-v-glass-nynyccityct-1901.