From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Haskin v. Murray

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 1, 1898
29 App. Div. 376 (N.Y. App. Div. 1898)

Opinion

May Term, 1898.

John M. Bowers, for the appellants.

Abel Crook, for the respondent.


This was an application made to the Trial Term, Part 2, to vacate an order granted by the Special Term directing that this cause be set down on the calendar of the Trial Term of the court, Part 2, on the first Monday of March, 1898. The motion was denied by Mr. Justice TRUAX for the reason, as stated by him, that "I will not vacate an order duly made by another justice. The remedy is by appeal." We think the court below properly disposed of this application. The order directing the case to be set down had been made and decided by the Special Term of the court, and the appellant here had appealed from that order. The motion to vacate that order made at the Trial Term was unnecessary, as the question as to the validity of the order could be settled upon the appeal. As, however, we have reversed the order of the Special Term on the appeal taken from it, this order should be affirmed, but without costs.

VAN BRUNT, P.J., BARRETT, RUMSEY and McLAUGHLIN, JJ., concurred.

Order affirmed, without costs.


Summaries of

Haskin v. Murray

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 1, 1898
29 App. Div. 376 (N.Y. App. Div. 1898)
Case details for

Haskin v. Murray

Case Details

Full title:JOHN B. HASKIN, JR., Respondent, v . ELIZABETH J. MURRAY and Others…

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

Date published: May 1, 1898

Citations

29 App. Div. 376 (N.Y. App. Div. 1898)
51 N.Y.S. 545