From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Whitbeck v. Cacioppi

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jan 18, 1950
276 App. Div. 939 (N.Y. App. Div. 1950)

Opinion

January 18, 1950.

Appeal from Columbia County Court.

Present — Foster, P.J., Heffernan, Brewster, Bergan and Coon, JJ.


The action involved a claim for the sum of $155.28 and was originally brought in Justice's Court in the town of Greenport, Columbia County. On a trial before the Justice and a jury, defendant-appellant was there successful. Subsequently the plaintiff-respondent appealed to the County Court and demanded a new trial in that court in accordance with the provisions of section 442 of the Justice Court Act. A new trial was granted and had before the County Judge, without a jury. As the result of that trial plaintiff-respondent recovered a verdict for the amount demanded. Defendant-appellant's points on appeal are not presented against the judgment on its merits but rather against the action of the County Court in trying the case de novo. We think the procedure followed was proper under the statute and that the statute is not unconstitutional. Judgment unanimously affirmed, with costs.


Summaries of

Whitbeck v. Cacioppi

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jan 18, 1950
276 App. Div. 939 (N.Y. App. Div. 1950)
Case details for

Whitbeck v. Cacioppi

Case Details

Full title:DAVE WHITBECK, Respondent, v. INEZ CACIOPPI, Appellant

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

Date published: Jan 18, 1950

Citations

276 App. Div. 939 (N.Y. App. Div. 1950)

Citing Cases

Matter of Dembitzer

While lawyers may instinctively react unfavorably to the idea that an appellate body should undertake to try…