Hyperlawhypertext legal database Goldenson v. Lawrence 20 N.Y.S. 616

← Cases

Goldenson v. Lawrence

20 N.Y.S. 616 Court N.Y. City Ct. Decision date 1892-10-24 Docket No. 1 English

Delivered by Ehrlich, C. J.

Contents

Majority

p. 616
Goldenson v. Lawrence et al.
(City Court of New York, General Term.
October 24, 1892.)
No. 1.

Headnote

Appeal—Order to Amend—Consent of Parties.
An order to amend, which recites the consent of the parties to its terms, concludes the parties on appeal.
Appeal from special term.
Action by Eva L. Goldenson against Chester B. Lawrence and others. From an order granting leave to serve an amended answer, and imposing conditions, defendants appeal. Affirmed.
Argued before Ehrlich, C. J., and Van Wyck and McCarthy, JJ.
Goodrich, Deady & Goodrich, for appellants. David Leventritt, for respondent.

The court below, on granting leave to amend, had the power to impose such terms as it deemed just, (Code, § 723;) and the terms imposed can hardly be called an abuse of discretion. Besides, the order recites that it was made with consent of the parties. This recital concludes the parties on appeal. Smith v. Grant, 11 Civil Proc. R. 354. Under the circumstances, the order appealed from must be affirmed, with costs. All concur.