Case Name: Hyman Blumenstock et al., Appellants, v. Naomi Weissman et al., Respondents, et al., Defendants
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Term
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1966-03-30
Citations: 50 Misc. 2d 119
Docket Number: 
Parties: Hyman Blumenstock et al., Appellants, v. Naomi Weissman et al., Respondents, et al., Defendants.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Miscellaneous Reports
Volume: 50
Pages: 119–120

Head Matter:
Hyman Blumenstock et al., Appellants, v. Naomi Weissman et al., Respondents, et al., Defendants.
Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department,
March 30, 1966.
Hyman Blumenstock, appellant in person, and for Florence Blumenstock and others, appellants. Allen M. Taylor and Martin M. Baxter for respondents.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
In our opinion the holding of the County Court that it lacked jurisdiction to entertain the motion to vacate its prior determination would be equally applicable to the Justice's Court had an application for similar relief been directed to that court in the first instance. (See Duran v. Chelsea Exch. Bank, 123 Misc. 158.)
The order should be affirmed, with $10 costs.
Margett, Brenner and Ollifpe, JJ., concur.
Order affirmed, etc.