From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Schoepflin v. Coffey

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Mar 1, 1901
59 App. Div. 625 (N.Y. App. Div. 1901)

Opinion

March Term, 1901.


Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. Held, that considering the interpretation put upon the original amended complaint by the Court of Appeals, we cannot properly hold that the terms imposed by the court at Special Term, as a condition of permitting the plaintiff to serve the proposed amended complaint, were an abuse of discretion, and such as to require a reversal of the order appealed from. Also held, that the amendments proposed for the first time in appellant's brief, and which it is suggested would be satisfactory if less onerous terms were imposed, should not be passed upon on this appeal, but should be passed upon in the first instance by the Special Term. All concurred. Spring and Williams, JJ., concurred in the affirmance of the order only.


Summaries of

Schoepflin v. Coffey

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Mar 1, 1901
59 App. Div. 625 (N.Y. App. Div. 1901)
Case details for

Schoepflin v. Coffey

Case Details

Full title:Charles F. Schoepflin, Appellant, v. Michael J. Coffey, Respondent

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

Date published: Mar 1, 1901

Citations

59 App. Div. 625 (N.Y. App. Div. 1901)