From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

BACK v. FIRST SOLOTWINER SICK BENEFIT SOC

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department
May 21, 1935
155 Misc. 585 (N.Y. App. Term 1935)

Opinion

May 21, 1935.

Appeal from the Municipal Court of New York, Borough of Manhattan, Fifth District.

Anton Cronick, for the appellant.

No one appearing for the respondent.


More than twenty days having elapsed after due entry of judgment and service of notice thereof, defendant was not entitled to an amendment or modification of judgment under section 129 of the Municipal Court Code. In addition the modification or amendment sought was not a correction for error of form or substance shown in the record itself. ( Frost v. City of New York, 177 N.Y.S. 220.)

Order reversed, with ten dollars costs, and motion denied.

All concur; present, HAMMER, CALLAHAN and SHIENTAG, JJ.


Summaries of

BACK v. FIRST SOLOTWINER SICK BENEFIT SOC

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department
May 21, 1935
155 Misc. 585 (N.Y. App. Term 1935)
Case details for

BACK v. FIRST SOLOTWINER SICK BENEFIT SOC

Case Details

Full title:NATALIE BACK, Appellant, v. FIRST SOLOTWINER SICK BENEFIT SOCIETY…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department

Date published: May 21, 1935

Citations

155 Misc. 585 (N.Y. App. Term 1935)
280 N.Y.S. 107

Citing Cases

Petrides v. Park Hill Restaurant, Inc.

The Appellate Term in the past has given that interpretation to the statute. ( Miller, Inc. v. Leahy Bldg.…