History
  • No items yet
midpage
Stillman v. Stillman
204 A.D. 845
N.Y. App. Div.
1922
Check Treatment

We consider that the only matter before us for judicial determination is whether Mr. Justice Morsehauser had jurisdiction to determine the motion. A notice of motion does not in itself bring the case within the control of any particular justice. Jurisdiction is obtained by a particular justice only when the notice of motion is brought on for hearing, and not by a service of the notice. At the time when the order to show cause was signed by Mr. Justice Morsehauser the motion had not been brought on for a hearing at Nyaek. Therefore we reach the conclusion that Mr. Justice Morsehauser had jurisdiction to entertain and determine the question, and so decide. Order affirmed, without costs. Blackmar, P. J., Rich, Kelly, Manning and Young, JJ., concur.

Case Details

Case Name: Stillman v. Stillman
Court Name: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Date Published: Nov 15, 1922
Citation: 204 A.D. 845
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.