From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Schwartz v. Schendel

Supreme Court, Appellate Term
May 1, 1898
23 Misc. 476 (N.Y. App. Term 1898)

Opinion

May, 1898.

Abraham B. Schleimer, for motion.

Benno Loewy, opposed.


It appears that after making the order opening the defendant's default upon conditions, the justice below made a subsequent order, which is the one appealed from, vacating his former order and in effect denying the motion on the ground that the conditions upon which his former order had been made had not been complied with. This motion is now made to dismiss the appeal on the ground that an appeal will not lie from such an order. We think the objection is well taken. Under chapter 748 of the Laws of 1896, an appeal lies only from an order opening a default. The right to appeal to this court from the determinations of the District Courts, now the Municipal Courts of the City of New York, rests upon statute; and as there is no statutory authority for such an appeal as has been taken here, this court has no jurisdiction to entertain it, and the motion to dismiss must, therefore, be granted, with $10 costs.

Present: BEEKMAN, P.J., GILDERSLEEVE and GIEGERICH, JJ.

Motion granted, with $10 costs.


Summaries of

Schwartz v. Schendel

Supreme Court, Appellate Term
May 1, 1898
23 Misc. 476 (N.Y. App. Term 1898)
Case details for

Schwartz v. Schendel

Case Details

Full title:OLGA SCHWARTZ, Respondent, v . SIMON SCHENDEL, Appellant

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Term

Date published: May 1, 1898

Citations

23 Misc. 476 (N.Y. App. Term 1898)
51 N.Y.S. 415

Citing Cases

Starr v. Silverman

The right of appeal to this court from a determination of the Municipal Court of the city of New York is a…

Salvino v. the Metropolitan Street Railway Co.

MacLEAN, J. The appeals should be dismissed upon the authority of Beebe v. Nassau Show Case Co., 41 A.D. 456;…