Case Name: Thomas B. Hedden, Respondent, v. Samuel Nederburg, Appellant
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Term
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1899-06
Citations: 28 Misc. 233
Docket Number: 
Parties: Thomas B. Hedden, Respondent, v. Samuel Nederburg, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Miscellaneous Reports
Volume: 28
Pages: 233–233

Head Matter:
Thomas B. Hedden, Respondent, v. Samuel Nederburg, Appellant.
(Supreme Court, Appellate Term,
June, 1899.)
Summary proceedings — Baseless appeals condemned.
An appeal, in summary proceedings, upon the part of a tenant will be dismissed where he offered no defense upon the trial and merely attempted to exclude competent testimony.
Appeal by the tenant from a final order in summary proceedings made in the Municipal Court of the City of Hew York, eighth district, borough of Manhattan.
Joseph Wilkenfeld, for appellant.
Julius Henry Cohen, for respondent.

Opinion:
Leventritt, J.
On a previous appeal to this court the final oi'der obtained by the landlord was reversed because of failure to prove service on the tenant, whose term was from month to month, of the statutory five days' notice. Hedden v. Nederburg, 25 Misc. Rep. 722; 55 N. Y. Supp. 613. On the retrial the omission was supplied but the tenant now appeals urging a series of technical objections which even, were they not trivial and frivolous, we should disregard in the interest of substantial justice. Code Civ. Pro., § 3063. No defense was interposed, the tenant's efforts being solely directed against the admission of proper testimony. All the jurisdictional facts were both alleged and proven. There was no good reason for this appeal.
The order will be affirmed.
Freedman, P. J., and MacLean, J., concur.
Order affirmed, with costs to respondent.