From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Niewiadowski v. Kulp-Waco, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Mar 12, 1952
279 App. Div. 974 (N.Y. App. Div. 1952)

Opinion

March 12, 1952.

Present — Taylor, P.J., McCurn, Vaughan, Kimball and Wheeler, JJ.


Order reversed, on the law, with $10 costs and disbursements, and motion denied, with $10 costs. Memorandum: The motion on which the order was granted was to restore the case to the calendar, it having been dismissed under rule 302 of the Rules of Civil Practice. The motion does not lie. The remedy, if any, was a motion to open the default. (See Klein v. Vernon Lbr. Corp., 269 App. Div. 71.) All concur. (Appeal from order granting plaintiff's motion to restore cause to foot of the Held Calendar.)


Summaries of

Niewiadowski v. Kulp-Waco, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Mar 12, 1952
279 App. Div. 974 (N.Y. App. Div. 1952)
Case details for

Niewiadowski v. Kulp-Waco, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:BRUNO NIEWIADOWSKI, Respondent, v. KULP-WACO, INC., et al., Appellants

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

Date published: Mar 12, 1952

Citations

279 App. Div. 974 (N.Y. App. Div. 1952)

Citing Cases

Radar-Electronics, Inc. v. Oscar Leventhal

MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT. The order of Trial Term vacated a dismissal of a complaint pursuant to rule 302 of…

Walsh v. Ben Riley's Arrowhead Inn, Inc.

Thereafter, it was again called, and again marked off in March, 1955. At the time the motion to dismiss was…