From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hutchins v. Parks

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 1, 1916
174 App. Div. 919 (N.Y. App. Div. 1916)
Download
PDF
Check
Treatment

Summary

In Hutchins v. Parks (174 App. Div. 919) it was held that it was improper to impose an order of reference as a condition of granting a motion for continuance (cf. Lawson v. Hill, 66 Hun 288).

Summary of this case from Stores v. McLaughlin
See 1 Summary

Opinion

July, 1916.

Order reversed, without costs, upon the ground that an order of reference as a condition of continuing the case should not have been made. The reference was not ordered because there was a referable issue. If the plaintiff would have a reference on such grounds, he should move for it and show that he is entitled to it. Jenks, P.J., Thomas, Carr, Rich and Putnam, JJ., concurred.

Summaries of

Hutchins v. Parks

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 1, 1916
174 App. Div. 919 (N.Y. App. Div. 1916)

In Hutchins v. Parks (174 App. Div. 919) it was held that it was improper to impose an order of reference as a condition of granting a motion for continuance (cf. Lawson v. Hill, 66 Hun 288).

Summary of this case from Stores v. McLaughlin
Case details for

Hutchins v. Parks

Case Details

Full title:FRANCIS S. HUTCHINS, Respondent, v. JOHN H. PARKS, Appellant

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

Date published: Jul 1, 1916

Citations

174 App. Div. 919 (N.Y. App. Div. 1916)

Citing Cases

Stores v. McLaughlin

The Saratoga Special Term in 1852, a year before the first statutory enactment on the subject held (HAND,…

1 Citing Cases