From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cohen, Goldman Co., Inc. v. Ellmann

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 1, 1922
202 App. Div. 787 (N.Y. App. Div. 1922)

Opinion

June, 1922.

Present — Clarke, P.J., Laughlin, Dowling, Page and Greenbaum, JJ.


The court at Special Term disregarded, as it was bound to do, the application so far as it was "for an order directing the signing of the order heretofore submitted to Mr. Justice Hotchkiss," and granted the alternative relief demanded for summary judgment, as upon an original motion therefor. As it appears on the face of the order appealed from, and the fact is admitted, that such motion was not opposed at Special Term, the motion to dismiss the appeal therefrom should be granted, but without costs and without prejudice to a motion by the defendant to open default.


Motion to dismiss appeal granted, without costs and without prejudice to a motion to open default.


Summaries of

Cohen, Goldman Co., Inc. v. Ellmann

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 1, 1922
202 App. Div. 787 (N.Y. App. Div. 1922)
Case details for

Cohen, Goldman Co., Inc. v. Ellmann

Case Details

Full title:COHEN, GOLDMAN Co., INC., Respondent, v . CAROLINE ELLMANN, Appellant

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

Date published: Jun 1, 1922

Citations

202 App. Div. 787 (N.Y. App. Div. 1922)

Citing Cases

People v. Robbins

It would appear from the rather meager record before us that the authority of the court was invoked in this…

Citizens Tr. v. Prescott Son, Inc. Nos. 3

From both the order denying its motion for postponement and the judgment defendant has appealed. To the case,…