Case ID: ny_138/html/0676-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

The Mayor, Aldermen and Commonalty of the City of New York, Appellant, v. James M. Smith, Impleaded, etc., Respondent.
    (Argued June 20, 1893;
    decided June 30, 1893.)
    The control possessed by courts of original jurisdiction over their judgments and orders, as well as in reference to the fact or the sufficiency of a notice of appearance in the action, is absolute, and not reviewable in this court, unless it appears that there was an abuse of discretion.
    Appeal from order of the General Term of the Superior Court of the city of Eew York, made October 8, 1892, which affirmed an order of Special Term granting a motion by the defendant, James M. Smith, to vacate the judgment herein as to him.
    The following is the mem. of opinion:
    “ Whether, under the circumstances disclosed, the court below should set aside the judgment as to this respondent, was a matter which rested in its discretion. The circumstances were such as to warrant the action taken, in our opinion; but, irrespective of that opinion, there can be no doubt that the control possessed by courts of original jurisdiction over their judgments and orders, as well as in reference to the fact, or the sufficiency, of a notice of appearance in the action, is absolute and beyond any review by this court, unless it appears that there was an abuse of discretion.
    “ The appeal should be dismissed, with costs,”
    
      David J. Dean for appellant.
    
      
      Wm. H. Newman for respondent.
   Per Curiam mem. for dismissal of appeal.

All concur.

Appeal dismissed.