Wykes v. Smarak
This text of 87 A. 333 (Wykes v. Smarak) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of New Jersey primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The opinion of the court was delivered by
On October 8th, 1912, the District Court rendered judgment for the plaintiff, and on October 15th the defendant gave notice of appeal and entered into bond as required by the statute. Pamph. L. 1910, p. 236; Comp. Stat., p. 2016, § 213a. On October 23d the trial judge, at the request of the defendant, grunted ten days further time in which to have the state of the case agreed upon or settled. Comp. Stat., p. 2017, § 213c. This the defendant did not do, and neither did he, within such period, obtain nor apply for any further extension of time.
His right to prosecute the appeal is therefore at an end. Franz-Milton Co. v. Hall, 44 Vroom 96; Syring v. Zelenski, 48 Id. 406.
The intent of the act was to secure speedy hearing of appeals.
The appeal will be dismissed, with costs.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
87 A. 333, 84 N.J.L. 529, 55 Vroom 529, 1913 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 56, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wykes-v-smarak-nj-1913.