Winnebrenner v. Edgerton
New York Supreme Court
Appeal from an order denying a motion by a subsequent judgment creditor, to vacate a judgment entered upon confession. The facts appear in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.—Davies, J.
Jones, a subsequent judgment creditor to the plaintiff in this case, moved to set aside this judgment, upon the ground that the statement upon which it was entered was not in conformity with section 383 of the Code.
It is a mistake in the counsel for the plaintiff to suppose that this motion is founded on any irregularity in entering up the judgment. If it had been, then it would certainly be necessary for the moving party to specify in his moving papers the grounds of his motion. The defects complained of are not mere irregularities. They are matters of substance, and…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Sheldon v. StrykerNew York Supreme Court · 1861
- Johnston v. A. L. Erlanger Realty Corp.New York Supreme Court · 1936
- Daly v. MathewsNew York Supreme Court · 1860
- Brown v. MarrigoldNew York Supreme Court · 1875
- Decker v. KitchenNew York Supreme Court · 1880
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.