From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Yorkshire Insurance v. Raw Fur & Skin Trading Co. of New York, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Nov 27, 1931
233 App. Div. 486 (N.Y. App. Div. 1931)

Opinion

November 27, 1931.

Appeal from Supreme Court of New York County.

Maurice Rose, for the appellants.

Kenneth R. Thompson of counsel [ Duncan Mount, attorneys], for the respondent.

Present — FINCH, P.J., McAVOY, MARTIN, O'MALLEY and TOWNLEY, JJ.


The motion was timely made. ( Jensen v. Weinhandler, 198 App. Div. 560.) The motion should have been granted, however, only to the extent of preferring the cause over other issues noticed for the same term. ( Morse v. Press Publishing Co., 71 App. Div. 351; Riglander v. Star Company, 98 id. 101; affd., 181 N.Y. 531.) As to further preference see Trial Term Rules (Rule V, ¶ 1; New York County Supreme Court Rules).

The order appealed from should be modified by granting the motion to the extent of preferring the cause over other issues noticed for the October, 1931, term.


Order modified by granting motion to the extent of preferring the cause over other issues noticed for the October, 1931, term, and as so modified affirmed, without costs.


Summaries of

Yorkshire Insurance v. Raw Fur & Skin Trading Co. of New York, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Nov 27, 1931
233 App. Div. 486 (N.Y. App. Div. 1931)
Case details for

Yorkshire Insurance v. Raw Fur & Skin Trading Co. of New York, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:THE YORKSHIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, LTD., Respondent, v. RAW FUR SKIN TRADING…

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

Date published: Nov 27, 1931

Citations

233 App. Div. 486 (N.Y. App. Div. 1931)
254 N.Y.S. 426

Citing Cases

HEEP v. CABEL

Order reversed on the law, without costs, and the motion denied, without costs. The court was without power…

Bank of United States v. Fenley Realty Co.

The Second Department, in Woerner v. Star Co. ( 107 A.D. 248, July, 1905), approved the ruling but granted a…