From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

O'Neill, Inc., v. Lockwhit Co.

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department
Oct 1, 1913
82 Misc. 383 (N.Y. App. Term 1913)

Opinion

October, 1913.

Hugo S. Mack (William Kaufman, of counsel), for appellant.

Paul M. Abrahams (George Trosk, of counsel), for respondents.


Under the authority of Gillin v. Canary, 19 Misc. 594, the practice of consolidating several actions, the aggregate of which is in excess of the amount for which the City Court is authorized to enter judgment, is not to be adopted. The amount demanded in the actions consolidated in the order appealed from is $6,043. It follows that the order should be reversed. The defendant may then move to have the several actions now pending in the City Court removed to the Supreme Court where they may be lawfully consolidated and tried as one action. Code Civ. Pro., §§ 319a, 817.

Order reversed with disbursements to appellant and motion denied.

GUY and BIJUR, JJ., concur.

Order reversed and motion denied.


Summaries of

O'Neill, Inc., v. Lockwhit Co.

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department
Oct 1, 1913
82 Misc. 383 (N.Y. App. Term 1913)
Case details for

O'Neill, Inc., v. Lockwhit Co.

Case Details

Full title:M.F. O'NEILL, INC., Appellant, v . LOCKWHIT COMPANY and CHARLES W. GRAHAM…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department

Date published: Oct 1, 1913

Citations

82 Misc. 383 (N.Y. App. Term 1913)
143 N.Y.S. 729