From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

White v. Richmond Light and Railroad Company

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 1, 1924
211 App. Div. 861 (N.Y. App. Div. 1924)

Opinion

December, 1924.


Order modified by striking out the provision staying the trial of the Municipal Court action pending the hearing and determination of the Supreme Court action, and by inserting in lieu thereof a provision that the Municipal Court action be removed to the Supreme Court, and consolidated with the action now pending in that court; and as so modified affirmed, without costs. The action in the Municipal Court can be consolidated with the Supreme Court action without prejudice to any substantial right. The plaintiff's motion to consolidate should, therefore, have been granted. (Civ. Prac. Act, § 97.) On appeal this court has the power to reverse, or affirm, wholly or partly, or may modify the order appealed from, and thus bring about the same result as would have followed a correct disposition of the motion at Special Term. (Civ. Prac. Act, § 584; Arnold v. Rothschild's Sons Co., 23 App. Div. 221, 223.) Kelly, P.J., Rich, Jaycox, Manning and Kelby, JJ., concur.

See, also, Civ. Prac. Act, § 96. — [REP.


Summaries of

White v. Richmond Light and Railroad Company

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 1, 1924
211 App. Div. 861 (N.Y. App. Div. 1924)
Case details for

White v. Richmond Light and Railroad Company

Case Details

Full title:J. RUSSELL WHITE, Respondent, v. RICHMOND LIGHT AND RAILROAD COMPANY…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Dec 1, 1924

Citations

211 App. Div. 861 (N.Y. App. Div. 1924)