Case ID: ny-st-rep_69/html/0563-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Giegerich, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Frederick or Fritz Berthold, Pl’ff, v. Moses K. Wallach, Def’t.
    
      (New York Common Pleas, Special Term,
    
    
      Filed September 4, 1895.)
    
    Ho lid ays—Motion.
    A motion, returnable at chambers on a holiday, stands over, in the absence of a judge, till the next day.
    Motion to compel the claimant under a mechanic’s lien to commence an action, or, in default thereof, that the lien be vacated and cancelled of record.
    
      Dittenhoefer, Q-erber & James, for motion.
   Giegerich, J.

The notice of motion was made returnable at chambers upon the 2d day of September, 1895, which was a legal holiday, being the first Monday of September, known as “ Labor Day.” Laws 1892, chap. 677, § 24. With regard to the transaction of business “ in public offices ” such a day is assimilated in nature to Sunday (Id. chap. 681, § 41); but while the courts cannot sit for the purpose of hearing motions upon Sunday (Code Civ. Proc. § 6), and a notice returnable upon that day is void, (Insurance Co. v. Hicks, 7 Abb. Prac. 204), yet it has been held that statutes similar to that above cited, as to public offices,” do not have bearing upon the courts. People ex rel. Vil. of Fulton v. Supervisors of Oswego, 50 Hun, 105; 19 St. Rep. 24; People v. Kearney, 47 Hun, 129; 13 St. Rep; 246; reversed upon another point, 110 N. Y. 188; 17 St. Rep. 165. While it is the custom of the court to adjourn upon the days enumerated in the act of 1892 as holidays (chap. 677, § 24), yet the legal effect of a public holiday is a matter resting entirely upon the statute; and I am constrained to hold that the first Monday of September is not a dies non with regard to the return of process, and that, in the absence of a judge at chambers, a motion, such as that before me, stands over, as of course, until the next day. Mathis v. Vail, 10 How. Prac. 458.

Motion granted.