Clinton v. Myers
New York Supreme Court
The defendant’s attorney noticed this action for trial at the present term of this court, but through mistake omitted to furnish the clerk with a note of the issue as required by section 356 of the Code. The defendant’s attorney now moves to have the cause entered upon the calendar according to the date of the issue. To which the plaintiff’s attorney objects.
1Opinion of the CourtBalcom, J.
—This cause has been regularly noticed for trial at this term of the court, by tbe defendant’s attorney. But it is not on the calendar, for the reason that such attorney did not furnish the clerk with a note of the issue as required by section 356 of the Code. And no such note of issue has yet been furnished to the clerk. The question now presented is, whether the court may, in its discretion, allow the defendant’s attorney to furnish.the clerk with a proper note of issue, and have the cause entered on the calendar, *96according to the date of the issue. It is provided by section 174 of the…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Yates v. McAdamNew York Supreme Court · 1896
- Gair v. BirminghamThe Superior Court of the City of New York and Buffalo · 1891
- Joyce v. Daily Mirror, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1933
- Wright v. ZimmermanNew York Supreme Court · 1897