Potter v. Rossiter
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Appeal by the defendants, Clinton L. Rossiter and others, from an order of the Supreme Court, made at the New York Special Term and entered in the office of the clerk of the county of New York on the' 28th day of August, 1905, denying the defendants’ motion to stay the ..plaintiffs’ proceedings under an interlocutory judgment.
1Opinion of the Court
Laughlin, J.:
The motion for a stay of proceedings was brought on and heard with the plaintiffs’ motion to punish the defendant company for contempt considered in the opinion delivered on the appeal argued and decided herewith (109 App. Div. 32). We are of opinion that the motion should have been granted. The terms offered by the defendants in their moving papers were more favorable to the plaintiffs than can be required. The defendants offered to give security for the payment of the money judgment authorized by the interlocutory judgment in case it should be affirmed on appeal. Inasmuch as…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Potter v. RossiterAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1905