From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Edell v. Edell

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jan 12, 1940
258 App. Div. 420 (N.Y. App. Div. 1940)

Opinion

January 12, 1940.

Appeal from Supreme Court of Monroe County, KENYON, J.

Merwin Morehouse, for the appellant.

Ira H. Morris, for the respondent.

Present — CROSBY, P.J., CUNNINGHAM, DOWLING, HARRIS and McCURN, JJ.


The motion to dismiss the appeal on the ground that the order appealed from was made on appellant's motion should be denied since it clearly appears from the order that the relief granted was not the relief sought by the appellant on her motion. ( Bloch v. Bloch, 136 App. Div. 770, 774.) The order was the act of the court and it was not necessary or appropriate to recite that it was made on the motion of appellant's attorney. This recital may be treated as surplusage. ( Davis v. Fogarty, 134 App. Div. 500, 501; Norton Siegel, Inc., v. Nolan, 276 N.Y. 392, 395, and cases cited.) Since the order denying defendant's motion to serve a supplemental answer containing counterclaims against the plaintiff affected a substantial right of the defendant, the stay now in effect should be continued pending the disposition of the appeal from the order herein. Cleary v. Douglas-Guardian Warehouse Corp. ( 253 App. Div. 790) is distinguishable from the instant case. In the Cleary case the movant made a motion and secured most of the relief prayed for and then entered the order and appealed from the whole order.

All concur.


Motion to dismiss appeal denied and motion for stay of proceedings pending hearing and determination of appeal granted.


Summaries of

Edell v. Edell

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jan 12, 1940
258 App. Div. 420 (N.Y. App. Div. 1940)
Case details for

Edell v. Edell

Case Details

Full title:WILLIAM J. EDELL, Respondent, v. EVELYN M. EDELL, Appellant

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

Date published: Jan 12, 1940

Citations

258 App. Div. 420 (N.Y. App. Div. 1940)
17 N.Y.S.2d 55

Citing Cases

Adreance v. Lorentzen

Such a motion may not be granted where there are two or more causes of action and one of them is sufficient.…