Case ID: misc_36/html/0834-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Fitzsimons, Ch. J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

CITY COURT OF NEW YORK, GENERAL TERM,
    OCTOBER, 1901.
    Charles A. Bucklin, Appellant, v. Charlotte B. Lawlor, Respondent.
    Appeal from an order of the Special Term denying the plaintiff’s motion to place on the day calendar this action, which stood “ reserved generally ” on the general calendar.
    William C. Relyea (George H. Fletcher, of counsel), for appellant.
    Eugene K. Sackett (Lemuel Skidmore, of counsel), for respondent.
   Fitzsimons, Ch. J.

The order appealed from must be affirmed. The stipulation made between the parties hereto reads: “ That this action shall not be brought on for trial until after a certain action pending in the Supreme Court shall have proceeded to judgment.” The action referred to in the Supreme Court has reached a stage where the defendant has entered an interlocutory judgment, and the other questions in said action are nqw before a referee for determination. The judgment so entered in the- defendant’s favor is merely an interlocutory, or as we choose to call it in this instance, a half-way, judgment. Although the question now before the referee must result in a verdict in the plaintiff’s favor, yet at this time a final judgment cannot be entered and thus all of the issues made by the complaint and answer are not fully and finally determined, so that the defendant may enter a full and final judgment. That is in our opinion what the parties meant when, in said stipulation, they used the word “ judgment.”

Therefore the order appealed from must be affirmed, with costs and disbursements of appeal.

Delehanty and Schuchman, JJ., concur.

Order affirmed, with costs.