History
  • No items yet
midpage
Cramp v. Dady
138 N.Y.S. 1112
N.Y. App. Div.
1912
Check Treatment

Motion denied, "with ten dollars costs. The court did not overlook the provisions of section 1001 of the Code of Civil Procedure. That applies only to a case where an interlocutory judgment has been entered and “ further proceedings must be taken before the court or a judge thereof, or a referee, before a final judgment can be entered.” So far as the defendants claiming through. Rachel Munroe and -Phcebe Hendrickson are concerned, no further proceedings must be taken. By whatever name designated as to them, the judgment is not interlocutory but final, and Brown v. Feek (204 N. Y. 238) is conclusive upon this point. (See, also, Matter of Halsey, 93 N. Y. 48.) Present — Jenks, P. J., Thomas, Carr, Woodward and Rich, JJ.

Case Details

Case Name: Cramp v. Dady
Court Name: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Date Published: Nov 15, 1912
Citation: 138 N.Y.S. 1112
Court Abbreviation: N.Y. App. Div.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.