Case ID: nys_78/html/1134-07.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

REMSEN et al., Respondents, v. HYAMS, Appellant.
    (Supreme Court. Appellate Division, First Department.
    November 7, 1902.)
    Action by Jane Remsen and another against Rosalie Hyams, individually and as executrix of the last will of Joel E. Hyams, deceased. From an ’order vacating and setting aside certain findings, and a judgment entered thereon in favor of plaintiffs, and permitting plaintiffs to serve an amended complaint, defendant appeals.
    Affirmed.
    Charles W. Coleman, for appellant. William R. Wilder, for respondents.
   PER CURIAM.

We think that the case of Hahl v. Sugo, 169 N. Y. 116, 62 N. E. 135, is an express authority for the granting of this motion. The order should be affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements.