From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Sulzbacher v. Cawthra

New York Common Pleas — General Term
Dec 1, 1895
14 Misc. 544 (N.Y. Misc. 1895)

Opinion

December, 1895.

Charles Strauss, for motion.

Blumenstiel Hirsch, opposed.


Defendant's motion to reduce the amount for which the attachment was granted is not inconsistent with its appeal from the order denying the motion to vacate the attachment. Both motions were availed of by the defendant as of right. Hence, this motion for dismissal of the appeal should be denied, with ten dollars costs.

Present: DALY, Ch. J., BISCHOFF and PRYOR, JJ.

Motion denied, with ten dollars costs.


Summaries of

Sulzbacher v. Cawthra

New York Common Pleas — General Term
Dec 1, 1895
14 Misc. 544 (N.Y. Misc. 1895)
Case details for

Sulzbacher v. Cawthra

Case Details

Full title:JOSEPH H. SULZBACHER, Respondent, v . J. CAWTHRA Co., LIMITED, Appellant

Court:New York Common Pleas — General Term

Date published: Dec 1, 1895

Citations

14 Misc. 544 (N.Y. Misc. 1895)
35 N.Y.S. 1118

Citing Cases

Brandley v. American Butter Co.

The plaintiff, on the other hand, insists that by virtue of its inherent authority, as well as by the express…