Case Name: Matter of the Mechanic's Lien Filed by Frederick or Fritz Berthold v. Moses K. Wallach
Court: New York Court of Common Pleas
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1895-09
Citations: 14 Misc. 55
Docket Number: 
Parties: Matter of the Mechanic’s Lien Filed by Frederick or Fritz Berthold v. Moses K. Wallach.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Miscellaneous Reports
Volume: 14
Pages: 55–56

Head Matter:
Matter of the Mechanic’s Lien Filed by Frederick or Fritz Berthold v. Moses K. Wallach.
(New York Common Pleas
Special Term,
September, 1895.)
The first Monday of September, known as Labor Day, is not a dies non with regard to the return of process, and a motion returnable on that day, in the absence of a judge at Chambers, stands over until the following day.
Motion by owner to compel the claimant to commence action, or in default thereof that the lien be vacated and canceled of record.
The opinion states the material facts.
Dittenhoefer, Gerber c& James, for owner and motion.
No appearance for claimant.

Opinion:
G-iegebice, J.
The notice of motion was made returnable at Chambers upon the 2d day of September, 1895, which was. a legal holiday, being the first Monday of September, known as Labor Day. ' Laws of 1892, chap. 677, § 24. With regard to the transaction of business " in public offices," such a day is assimilated in nature to Sunday (Laws of 1892, chap. 681, § 41); -but while the courts cannot sit for the purpose of hearing motions upon Sunday (Code Civ. Proc. § 6), and a notice returnable upon that day is void (Arctic Fire Ins. Co. v. Hicks, 7 Abb. 204), yet it has been held that statutes similar to that above cited, as to " public offices," do not have bearing (upon the courts. People ex rel. Fulton v. Suprs. of Oswego, 50 Hun, 105; People v. Kearney, 47 id. 129, reversed upon another point, 110 N. Y. 188; While it is the custom of the court to adjourn upon the days enumerated in the act of 1892 ¡as holidays (Chap. 677, § 24), yet the legal effect of a public holiday is a matter resting entirely upon the statute, and I am constrained to hold that the first Monday of September is not a •dies non with regard to the return of process, and that in the ¡absence of a judge at Chambers, a motion such as that before me stands over, as of course, until the next day. Mathis v. Vail, 10 How. 458. Motion granted.
Motion granted.