Case ID: nys_66/html/1134-10.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "CONLAN, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

KING, Respondent, v. GOSSEL, Appellant.
    (City Court of New York,
    General Term.
    October 29, 1900.)
    Action by Nellie King agains Henry Gossel. From an order denying defenc ant’s motion for leave to serve an amende answer, defendant appeals.
    Reversed.
    Carte Hughes & Dwight, for appellant. Daniel YY Patterson, for respondent.
   CONLAN, J.

This is an appeal from an oi der, made at special term, denying defendant’ motion for leave to serve an amended answei We are satisfied, on examination, that the de lendant should be allowed to serve his proposed l imended answer. The order appealed from will 3e modified, so as to allow defendant to serve lis answer within five days from the entry of m order on this decision, on the payment of :axable costs to date, together with $10 costs if this motion, at the same time stipulating :hat the cause retain its place on the calendar md be tried when reached; otherwise, order ippealed from affirmed, and costs of this appeal n either event to respondent.

FITZSIMONS, C. J., and HASOALL, J., con:ur.