Lissner v. Dochtermann — 97 N.Y.S. 230

Majority

p. 230

LISSNER v. DOCHTERMANN et al.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Term.

January 17, 1906.)

Headnote

Judgment—Modification—Time of Motion.

Under Municipal Court Act, Laws 1902, p. 1563, c. 580, § 254, requiring a motion to amend or modify a judgment to be made within five days after the rendition of the* judgment, a motion for an order to amend a judgment by striking therefrom an allowance of costs, when not made until more than five days after the rendition of judgment, comes too late.

[Ed. Note.—For cases in point, see vol. 30, Cent. Dig. Judgment, § 619.J

p. 231

” Appeal from Municipal Court, Borough of Manhattan,. Fifth District.

Action by Henry Lissner against Charles Dochtermann and others. From an order amending a judgment, defendants appeal.

Reversed.

Argued before SCOTT, P. J., and BLANCHARD, and DOWL-ING, JJ.

George Freifeld and S. C. Steinhardt, for appellants.

Maurice H. Gotlieb, for respondent.

This is an appeal by the defendants from an order amending the judgment in favor of the defendants by striking therefrom the allowance of $30 for costs and disbursements. The- motion for the order appealed from was made more than five days after the judgment was rendered, and according to section 254 of the municipal court act (Laws 1902, p. 1563, c. 580), was too late. Buchsbaum v. Feldman, 43 Misc. Rep. 85 , 86 N. Y. Supp. 747 .

Order reversed, with costs to appellant. All concur.