Case Name: ALEKSC FRYTEZ, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. KATHERINE GRUCHACZ, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT
Court: New Jersey Court of Errors and Appeals
Jurisdiction: New Jersey
Decision Date: 1941-01-28
Citations: 125 N.J.L. 630
Docket Number: 
Parties: ALEKSC FRYTEZ, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. KATHERINE GRUCHACZ, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.
Judges: 
Reporter: New Jersey Law Reports
Volume: 125
Pages: 630–631

Head Matter:
ALEKSC FRYTEZ, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. KATHERINE GRUCHACZ, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.
Submitted October 25, 1940
Decided January 28, 1941.
For the appellant, Rospond & Rospond (Felix Rospond, of counsel).
For the respondent, Thomas Brunetto.

Opinion:
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Bodine, J.
The appeal is from a judgment of nonsuit entered pursuant to N. J. S. A. 2:27-215. We find no abuse of discretion. Stein v. Goodenough, 73 N. J. L. 812.
An action was commenced in November, 1926, to recover on a note of April 23d, 1923, and for money advanced to the defendant during the years 1922 to 1925. Nothing seems to have been done in this cause till a default judgment was entered in 1939. This judgment was vacated and the service of a summons set aside. An earlier suit for the same cause of action was then discovered, and it is claimed that a notice of trial was then served on the defendant, her attorney being dead. The plaintiff's attorney had not notified the defendant to employ an attorney. N. J. S. A. 2:20-6. It is not necessary, however, to decide whether that step should have been taken since the trial judge has entire control of his calendars, and we do not think a cause so long delayed in prosecution should have a place in the court.
The judgment is affirmed.
For affirmance — The Chancellob, Paekeb, Case, Bodine, Donges, Poetee, Deae, Wells, Raffeety, JJ'. 9.
For reversal — Ti-ie Chief Justice, Hbilee, Pebsiue, WolfsKbil, Hague, JJ. 5.