Case ID: ad_29/html/0376-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Ingraham, J.:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

John B. Haskin, Jr., Respondent, v. Elizabeth J. Murray and Others, Defendants; Adele Le Compte and Mary Ann Le Compte, Appellants. (No. 2.)
    
      Order — application at a Trial Term to vacate an order granted at Special Term, denied.
    
    A motion made at the Trial Term, Part 2, to vacate an order granted hy the Special Term, directing that a cause he set down on the calendar of the Trial Term of the court, Part 2, for a certain day, is properly denied, especially where an appeal has -been taken from such order, upon which its validity can he determined.
    Appeal by the infant defendants, Adele Le Oompte and another, from an order of the Supreme Court, made at the Hew York Trial Term and entered in the office of the clerk of the county of Hew York on the 19th day of March, 1898, denying their motion to vacate an order granting a preference.
    
      John M. Bowers, for the appellants.
    
      Abel Crook, for the respondent.
   Ingraham, J.:

This was an application made to the Trial Term, Part 2, to vacate an order granted hy the Special Term directing that this cause he set down on the calendar of the Trial Term of the court, Part 2, on the first Monday of March, 1898. The motion was denied by Mr. Justice Truax for the reason, as stated by him, that “I will not vacate an order duly made by another justice. The remedy is by appeal.” We think the court below properly disposed of this application. The ordér directing the case to be set down had been made and decided by the Special Term of the court, and the appellant here had appealed from that order. The motion to vacate that order made at the Trial Term was unnecessary, as the question as to the validity of the order could be settled upon the appeal. As, however, we have reversed the order of the Special Term on the appeal taken from it, this order should be affirmed, but without costs.

Van Brunt, P. J., Barrett, Rumsey and McLaughlin, JJ., concurred.

Order affirmed, without costs.