Rothschild v. Rio Grande Western Railway Co.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Motion by the respondent to dismiss an appeal pending in the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the first department.
1Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam :
Upon reference to rule 35 of the General Rules of Practice it will be seen that at the time that the appellant’s attorney procured the order to file the case from the judge who settled the same, his right so to do had become lost because of his failure to have the case signed by the judge and filed within ten days after it had been settled—the rule providing that in case this is not done the case shall be deemed abandoned' unless the time is extended by order. It was, therefore, the duty of the attorney, finding that he could not get his case filed within the ten days provided by…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Brush v. Blot.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1896
- Fowler v. New York Herald Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1921
- Carr v. ButlerNew York Supreme Court · 1900
- Lightner v. Hartmann-Blanchard Co.Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1918