From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

DE FINI v. IMPERATORI

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department
Apr 12, 1926
127 Misc. 42 (N.Y. App. Term 1926)

Opinion

April 12, 1926.

Appeal from the City Court of the City of New York.

Canter Pines [ Leonard F. Fish of counsel], for the appellant.

Nadal, Jones Mowton [ Irving W. Young, Jr., of counsel], for the respondent.


An examination of the papers indicates that defendant suffered a default in a fairly inexcusable manner and has twice refrained from showing in its affidavits any real merit in the defense, and in particular, from giving the names of witnesses who could prove such defense, if any, although the necessity of that course was suggested at the time of the denial of the first motion. Under these circumstances we do not think that any further leave should be granted.

Order modified by striking therefrom the provision for a renewal of the motion and as modified affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements to appellant.

All concur; present, BIJUR, LYDON and LEVY, JJ.


Summaries of

DE FINI v. IMPERATORI

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department
Apr 12, 1926
127 Misc. 42 (N.Y. App. Term 1926)
Case details for

DE FINI v. IMPERATORI

Case Details

Full title:CONCETTA DE FINI, Appellant, v. SUZANNA IMPERATORI, Respondent

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department

Date published: Apr 12, 1926

Citations

127 Misc. 42 (N.Y. App. Term 1926)
215 N.Y.S. 175