Case ID: nys_149/html/1069-01.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

AMERICAN SLICING MACH. CO., Appellant, v. CORKEDALE, Respondent.
    (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.
    November 6, 1914.)
    Action by the American Slicing Machine Company against Maxwell Corkedale.
   PER CURIAM.

Although we have repeatedly called attention to the rule requiring appellant to state facts showing that the appeal is a meritorious one, there has been no attempt to comply with this rule. In addition, no excuse is offered for appellant’s laches. The motion to dismiss the appeal is granted, with $10 costs.