Case ID: ny-super-ct_50/html/0526-02.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

James M. Tuttle, appellant, v. Richard P. Rothwell, respondent.
    Decided February 4, 1884.
    Appeal by plaintiff from order striking from the complaint irrelevant and redundant allegations. Motion by respondent to dismiss the appeal.
    Edward M. Shepard, for appellant;
    Abram Kling, for respondent.
    Before Sedgwick, Ch. J., and O’ Gorman, J.
   Per Curiam.

Order appealed from affirmed, with $10 costs, and disbursements to be faxed. The court does not pass upon the merits of the motion to dismiss, but having affirmed the order, denies the motion, formally, without costs.