DIEHL v. BECK

Full title: BALTHASAR DIEHL, Respondent, v . DAVID BECK and ROSA BECK, Appellants

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

Date published: Jun 1, 1901

61 App. Div. 570 (N.Y. App. Div. 1901)

70 N.Y.S. 818

Opinion

June Term, 1901.

Jacob Rieger, for the appellants.

Frank Barker, for the respondent.

Present — PATTERSON, O'BRIEN, INGRAHAM, McLAUGHLIN and HATCH, JJ.

PER CURIAM:

The defendant neglected to serve with his motion papers the proposed pleading; and this, among others, may have been the reason for the denial of the motion. Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements.

PER CURIAM:

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements.