Hyperlawhypertext legal database Addressograph Co. v. H. B. Goetchius & Co. 131 N.Y.S. 583

← Cases

Addressograph Co. v. H. B. Goetchius & Co.

131 N.Y.S. 583 Court N.Y. App. Term Decision date 1911-11-10 English

Contents

Majority

p. 583
ADDRESSOGRAPH CO. v. H. B. GOETCHIUS & CO.
(Supreme Court, Appellate Term.
November 10, 1911.)

Headnote

Judgment (§ 145*)—Opening Default—Requisites of BIoving Papers.
A motion to open a default judgment is properly denied, where the moving papers do not contain an affidavit of merits or a proposed answer.
[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Judgment, Cent. Dig. §§ 271, 292-295; Dec. Dig. § 145.*]
Appeal from Municipal Court, Borough of Manhattan, Fifth District.
Action by the Addressograph Company against H. B. Goetchius & Co. From an order of the Municipal Court of the City of New York, refusing to open a default judgment, defendant appeals. Affirmed. Argued before SEABURY, GUY, and COHARAN, JJ.
Thomas Moore Simonton, for appellant.
Jacob S. Katzman, for respondent.

This is an appeal from an order denying a motion to open a default, and to vacate a judgment of the Municipal Court, rendered in favor of the plaintiff against the defendant. The moving papers do not contain either an affidavit of merits or a proposed answer, and presumably for this reason the motion was denied. Schumpp v. Interurban Ry. Co., 81 App. Div. 576 , 81 N. Y. Supp. 366 ; Reid v. Jackson’s Exp. Co., 107 N. Y. Supp. 633 ; Bloch v. Weinstein, 113 N. Y. Supp. 1067 .

Order affirmed, with costs, with leave to defendant to renew in the court below upon proper papers.

Cases cited