Summary
In Victor v. Turetz (N.Y.L.J., July 29, 1941, p. 222, EDER, J. [ 178 Misc. 985]) where an attempt was made to amend a judgment of the court, by stipulation, without order of the court, it was held to be without effect and that a motion for modification of the final judgment was the prescribed and proper practice.
Summary of this case from Stuart v. StuartOpinion
July 29, 1942.
Abraham J. Halprin, for the motion.
Albert Mintzer, opposed.
Motion to punish defendant Carl Turetz for contempt is granted. The receiver herein is an officer of the court within the meaning of subdivision 4 of section 505 of the Civil Practice Act; this appears to be settled by Potter v. Emerson-Steuben Corp. ( 251 A.D. 841; affg., 162 Misc. 392). General Electric Co. v. Sire ( 88 A.D. 498), upon which defendant so strongly relies, is clearly distinguishable; there the receiver was appointed for the benefit of judgment creditors and stood in like position as a receiver appointed in supplementary proceedings and such a receiver was held not to be an officer of the court within the mentioned provision. The receiver here is not one of that type. There is no inconsistency of ruling, nor is there any conflict of decision between the General Electric Co. and Potter cases; the distinction between the different types of receiver is marked and clear. The other contentions raised by defendant are not deemed to possess any merit and require no further discussion. Settle order forthwith on one day's notice.