Opinion
March 15, 1934.
Appeal from the Municipal Court, Borough of Manhattan, First District.
Maurice Kozinn, for the appellant.
Henry Goldstein, for the respondent.
The provision of subdivision 7 of section 78 of the Municipal Court Code for "motion or notice" is construed as motion on notice. ( Teitelbaum v. Empire Bottling Works, 100 Misc. 103.) Such notice must be in writing. Under this section a party may be precluded only as to those matters of which particulars have not been furnished. ( Witschieben v. Glynn, 156 A.D. 193.)
Order reversed and motion denied, with leave to renew within ten days after service of order entered hereon.
All concur; present, HAMMER, CALLAHAN and FRANKENTHALER, JJ.