From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Muller v. City of Philadelphia

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 26, 1911
144 App. Div. 592 (N.Y. App. Div. 1911)

Opinion

May 26, 1911.

J. Power Donellson, for the motion.

J. Noble Hayes and D.C. Myers, opposed.

Present — INGRAHAM, P.J., McLAUGHLIN, LAUGHLIN, CLARKE and SCOTT, JJ.


In the absence of consent by the respondent the court has no authority to allow the appeal to be heard without furnishing a complete copy of the judgment roll. Section 1353 of the Code of Civil Procedure especially requires that an appeal from a final judgment must be heard upon a certified copy of the notice of appeal, of the judgment roll, and of the case or notice of exceptions, if any, filed as prescribed by law or the general rules of practice. Under this section the respondents are entitled as a matter of right to have the entire judgment roll before the court on the hearing of the appeal. In this case it is stated that there are several appeals from the judgment by different defendants. These appeals should all be consolidated and heard upon one record so that the questions can be disposed of at one time. Of course if the parties consent portions of the judgment roll not pertinent to the several appeals can be eliminated from the record on which the appeal is to be heard, but without such consent the whole judgment roll should be printed.

The motion is, therefore, denied, without costs.


Motion denied, without costs. Settle order on notice.


Summaries of

Muller v. City of Philadelphia

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 26, 1911
144 App. Div. 592 (N.Y. App. Div. 1911)
Case details for

Muller v. City of Philadelphia

Case Details

Full title:CHARLES F. MULLER and Others, as Executors, etc., Plaintiffs, v . THE CITY…

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

Date published: May 26, 1911

Citations

144 App. Div. 592 (N.Y. App. Div. 1911)
129 N.Y.S. 1037

Citing Cases

Lederer v. Field and Fancy Publishing Company

Motion denied upon condition that appellant print as an addendum that part of the judgment roll which was…