From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Riccardi v. Rogosin

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department
Dec 20, 1927
131 Misc. 46 (N.Y. App. Term 1927)

Opinion

December 20, 1927.

Appeal from the City Court of the City of New York, county of New York.

Feigin Feigin [ Harold H. Feigin of counsel], for the appellants.

Samuel J. Siegel, for the respondent.


Although there seems to be no precedent for the motion in precisely the form in which it is made, no objection apparently has been taken either below or here to its mere form. It is substantially a motion made to facilitate the proper settlement of the case. Defendants claim, and there is no contradiction, that some ten pages of the minutes containing colloquy between the trial court and defendants' counsel have been omitted and that they include remarks by the court which defendants' counsel consider prejudicial and which must, in pursuance of his duty to his client, be submitted to the appellate court on the appeal. There is no denial, either, of the fact that these remarks had been taken down by the stenographer. The appropriate provisions of the Judiciary Law entitle appellants to the relief which they have asked.

Order reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion granted, with ten dollars costs.

All concur; present, BIJUR, LEVY and CRAIN, JJ.


Summaries of

Riccardi v. Rogosin

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department
Dec 20, 1927
131 Misc. 46 (N.Y. App. Term 1927)
Case details for

Riccardi v. Rogosin

Case Details

Full title:SALVATORE RICCARDI, Respondent, v. ISRAEL ROGOSIN and Another, Appellants

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department

Date published: Dec 20, 1927

Citations

131 Misc. 46 (N.Y. App. Term 1927)
225 N.Y.S. 688

Citing Cases

Devine v. Keller

However, although no request was made by either party to have the summations taken, the trial court erred in…