Zimmerman v. Rahmeyer

230 A.D. 719
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided June 15, 1930·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

Order reversed upon the law, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion denied, with ten dollars costs. The court was without authority to permit the plaintiff to servé and file a notice of trial and a note of issue nunc pro tunc as of February 4, 1929. (Civ. Prac. Act, § 433; Rules Civ. Prac. rule 150.) The court was further without authority to grant a preference until the case was properly on the calendar. (Roberts v. Schaf, 76 App. Div. 433; Manarrow Realties, Inc., v. Conrad Corporation, 222 id. 652; Davis v. Friedman, 196 id. 926.) Lazansky, P. J., Rich, Hagarty, Carswell and Tompkins, JJ., concur.

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

Zimmerman v. Rahmeyer, 230 A.D. 719 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1930).

230 A.D. 719 (Zimmerman v. Rahmeyer) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Vinal v. New York Central Railroad
48 Misc. 2d 362 (New York Supreme Court, 1965)
Moran v. Portchester Iron Works, Inc.
11 A.D.2d 783 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1960)
Roman v. Caputo
278 A.D. 327 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1951)
Rea v. Horton
241 A.D. 742 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1934)
Kost v. Nassau Boulevard Realties, Inc.
240 A.D. 731 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1933)