Opinion
September, 1929.
Present — Van Kirk, P.J., Hinman, Davis, Whitmyer and Hill, JJ.
Appeal dismissed, on the ground that no appeal lies from a denial of application to reopen.
From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research
Matter of Mittiga v. United States Aluminum Co.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Sep 1, 1929
227 App. Div. 680 (N.Y. App. Div. 1929)
Summaries of
Matter of Mittiga v. United States Aluminum Co.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Sep 1, 1929
227 App. Div. 680 (N.Y. App. Div. 1929)
Case details for
Matter of Mittiga v. United States Aluminum Co.
Case Details
Full title:In the Matter of the Claim of ELIZABETH MITTIGA, Appellant, against UNITED…
Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Date published: Sep 1, 1929
Citations
227 App. Div. 680 (N.Y. App. Div. 1929)
Citing Cases
Thomas v. Einbinder
A further question is whether the discretionary denial of an application for reconsideration under § 22 is…
McLaskey v. City of New YorkWe think the denial of the application was an abuse of discretion, and that in the interests of justice the…