Case ID: nys_59/html/1098-05.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

BALCH, Respondent, v. CITY OF UTICA et al., Respondents (KINNEY, Appellant).
    (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.
    July 18, 1899.)
    Action by Orville Balch against the city of Utica and others. Judgment for defendants. From an order adjudging Thomas Kinney in contempt for failure to obey the judgment, he appealed.
    Reversed.
    James Coupe, for appellant Kinney. G. O. Morehouse, for respondents city of Utica and Cantwell. S. M. "Linsley, for respondent Stappenbeck.
   PER CURIAM.

Order appealed from reversed, upon the ground that the judgment against the defendant Kinney, granting affirmative relief to his Co-defendants, is invalid, for reasons given on the appeal from the order denying the motion of the defendant Kinney to modify the judgment, in the opinion of Nash, J., reported in 59 N. Y. Supp. 516; $10 costs of this appeal, and disbursements, and $10 costs of motion at special term, to the appellant Kinney against the respondents city of Utica, John A. Cantwell, and Henry Stappenbeck.