Legal Opinion

Quinn v. City of New York

New York Supreme Court

Decided February 10, 1960PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMatthew M. Levy, J.

This is a motion by defendant to vacate an order, assertedly entered ex parte, granting plaintiffs’ motion to vacate defendant’s notice to examine plaintiffs before trial and for a denial of the motion to vacate. The order attacked was not made ex parte, but was granted on default on the call of the motion calendar at Special Term, Part I. The primary question is whether there was truly a default on the part of defendant.

*117The action is against the City of New York to recover damages for an accident that occurred at the entrance to Pier 97, at the foot of 57th Street and North River in…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Marie Dorros, Inc. v. Dorros Bros.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1948
  2. Semsky v. Jo-Mar Bake Shop Inc.New York Supreme Court · 1958

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Ellis v. UrsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1986
  2. Perl v. New York City Housing AuthorityNew York Supreme Court · 1962
  3. Waugh v. Firemen's Fund InsuranceNew York Supreme Court · 1966
  4. Heller v. New York City Housing AuthorityNew York Supreme Court · 1960
  5. Koltun v. Board of EducationNew York Supreme Court · 1960

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API