Hyperlawhypertext legal database Cleary v. New York State Railways 198 A.D. 228

← Cases

Cleary v. New York State Railways

198 A.D. 228 Court Fourth Department, Decision date 1921-10-19 English

Contents

Majority

p. 228
Jeremiah J. Cleary, Respondent, v. New York State Railways, Appellant.
Fourth Department,
October 19, 1921.

Headnote

Appeal — decisions reviewable—City Court of Rochester—order denying motion to set aside verdict of jury and for new trial appealable under provisions of charter of city of Rochester — timeliness of motion in City Court should be determined upon appeal therefrom.
An order denying the defendant’s motion to set aside the verdict of the jury rendered on a trial in the City Court of Rochester, Civil Branch, and for a new trial is appealable under the provisions of the charter of the city of Rochester.
The question that the motion was not made timely in the City Court should be determined upon the appeal from the order of said court.
Appeal by the defendant, New York State Railways, from an order of the County Court of • the county of Monroe, entered in the office of the clerk of said county on the 2d day of June, 1921, dismissing the appeal of the defendant to the County Court from an order of the City Court of Rochester, Civil Branch, denying defendant’s motion to set aside the verdict of the jury and staying proceedings upon execution, by filing an undertaking on said appeal.
Frank H. Parker, for the appellant.
William, W. Armstrong, for the respondent.

We are of the opinion that the order denying the defendant’s motion to set aside the verdict of the jury and for a new trial is appealable under the provisions of the charter of the city of Rochester (Laws of 1907, chap. 755, § 512, subd. (c), as added by Laws of 1918, chap. 495; Id. § 524-a, as added by Laws of 1920, chap. 434[1] ). As regards the question that the motion was not made timely in the City Court, we think that question should be determined upon the appeal from the order of the City Court which the defendant seeks to

* Since penum. § 522 and amd. by Laws of 1921, chap. 525.— [Rep .

p. 229
review. The order dismissing the appeal should be reversed, with ten' dollars costs.

All concur.

Order reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion denied, with ten dollars costs.