From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rouse v. Goodman

City Court of New York — General Term
Apr 1, 1894
8 Misc. 691 (N.Y. City Ct. 1894)

Opinion

April, 1894.

William A. Gans, for respondent.

Abraham Levy, for appellant.


This is an appeal by the defendant judgment debtor from an order denying a motion to remove a referee in supplementary proceedings on the ground that that referee has his office in the same office with the plaintiff's attorney.

On the hearing of the motion this was disputed, and it was also asserted and sworn to that the judgment debtor appeared at the examination and waived this objection.

This is also certified to by the referee.

On these facts the justice at Special Term, in the exercise of his sound discretion, denied the motion to remove.

The facts are sufficient to justify this determination, and, there being no abuse of discretion, order must be affirmed, with costs.

NEWBURGER and CONLAN, JJ., concur.

Order affirmed, with costs.


Summaries of

Rouse v. Goodman

City Court of New York — General Term
Apr 1, 1894
8 Misc. 691 (N.Y. City Ct. 1894)
Case details for

Rouse v. Goodman

Case Details

Full title:CALLMAN ROUSE, Respondent, v . AARON GOODMAN, Appellant

Court:City Court of New York — General Term

Date published: Apr 1, 1894

Citations

8 Misc. 691 (N.Y. City Ct. 1894)