Case ID: ny_287/html/0089-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Per Curiam.\n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Thomas Quinn, Appellant.
    Argued October 14, 1941;
    decided November 27, 1941.
    
      Henry A. Lowenberg for appellant.
    The Court of Appeals has the right to hear and determine this appeal from the order denying the motion for a reargument. (Code Crim. Proc. § 519; People ex rel. Duryee v. Duryee, 188 N. Y. 440; People v. Priori, 163 N. Y. 99; People v. Mayhew, 151 N. Y. 607.)
    
      William O’Dwyer, District Attorney (Henry J. Walsh of counsel), for respondent.
    No appeal lies from the order of the Appellate Division denying reargument. (Fleischmann v. Stern, 90 N. Y. 110; People ex rel. Urban W. S. Co. v. Connolly, 164 App. Div. 163; Petersen v. Felt, 61 App. Div. 176; Tucker v. Dudley, 104 App. Div. 191; Harding v. Conlon, 146 App. Div. 842; Young v. Corning, 183 App. Div. 923; Weiss v. Weiss, 225 App. Div. 700; Babho Realty Co. v. Feffer, 230 App. Div. 866; Kelmenson v. Boulevard Construction Corp., 232 App, Div. 847; People v. Speiser, 277 N. Y. 342; People v. Zerillo, 200 N. Y. 443; People v. Reed, 276 N. Y. 5.)
   Per Curiam.

The appeal must be dismissed because this court has no power to entertain an appeal from an order of the Appellate Division denying a motion for reargument. The fact that this appellant’s codefendant was granted a new trial by this court (see People v. Kress, 284 N. Y. 452), while this appellant failed to appeal, does not give this court any power which it would not otherwise possess. Appellant no longer has any remedy in the courts.

The appeal should be dismissed.

Lehman, Ch. J., Loughran, Finch, Rippey, Lewis, Conway and Desmond, JJ., concur.

Appeal dismissed.