Case ID: nys_145/html/1024-01.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

MANHATTAN SCENIC STUDIOS, Inc., v. FIELDS.
    (Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department.
    February 13, 1914.)
    1. Courts (§ 189*)—Municipal Court—Adjournment—Time. Under Municipal Court Act (Laws 1902, c. 580) § 194, prohibiting an adjournment without consent for a period exceeding 90 days from return of the summons, an adjournment from the return day, September 17, 1913, to February 21, 1914, was unauthorized.
    [Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Courts, Cent. Dig. §§ 409, 412, 413, 429, 458; Dec. Dig. § 189.*]
    2. Courts (§ 190*)—Municipal Court—Orders Appealable. Under Municipal Court Act (Laws 1902, c. 580) §§ 253-257, relating to opening defaults, to motions to set aside verdict or vacate judgment, to the granting of new trials, and to appeal from such orders, an order of adjournment for a time beyond that limited by section 194 is not appealable.
    [Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Courts, Dec. Dig. § 190.*]
    Appeal from Municipal Court, Borough of Manhattan, First District.
    Action by the Manhattan Scenic Studios, Inc., against Lew Fields. From an order granting a long adjournment of the action under Municipal Court Act (Laws 1902, c. 580) § 194, plaintiff appeals. Dismissed.
    Argued January term, 1914, before LEHMAN, PAGE, and BI-JUR, JJ.
    Hyman Dominitz, of New York City, for appellant.
    William Klein, of New York City, for respondent.
   PER CURIAM.

The return day of the summons was September 17, 1913. The date to which the case was adjourned was February 21, 1914. Section 194 of the Municipal Court Act (Laws 1902, c. 580) prohibits an adjournment without consent for a period exceeding 90 days from the return of the summons. Conlan v. Murray (Sup.) 92 N. Y. Supp. 58. The order was unauthorized, but is not one from which an appeal is authorized to this court (sections 253-257, Mun. Ct. Act), and is therefore not appealable. Spiegelman v. Union Ry. Co., 95 App. Div. 92, 88 N. Y. Supp. 478.

Appeal dismissed, without costs.