Legal Opinion

Tanner v. Tanner

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided September 15, 1926PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Per curiam

There is nothing in the record which reflects unfavorably on the conduct of the defendant’s attorney. We think, however, in view of the nature of the action, that the court had discretionary power on its own motion to set aside the interlocutory judgment and that there was no abuse of discretion. The motion is, therefore, denied, without costs. Motion denied.

2Cited by2 opinions

  1. Burgher v. BurgherNew York Supreme Court · 1945
  2. Owens v. OwensNew York Supreme Court · 1932