TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Agor v. Country Airways, Inc.

Jesse C. Agor v. Country Airways, Inc.

Agor v. Country Airways, Inc., 278 A.D. 666 (1951)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · State Appellate Courts
Decided
February 19, 1951
Citations
278 A.D. 666102 N.Y.S.2d 6721951 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4288

Opinion of the Court

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

In a summary proceeding, order and judgment (one paper) of the County Court, Putnam County, dated September 14, 1950, resettling an order and judgment (one paper) dated September 1, 1950, modified on the law by striking out the third ordering paragraph thereof, and by inserting a provision that any parts of the original order and judgment which are madfe effective by reference in the resettled order and judgment, to the effect that the landlord is entitled to delivery of possession of the premises and that a warrant issue, are struck out. As thus modified, the resettled order and judgment is unanimously affirmed, with costs to appellant. The stipulation constituted, in effect, a deposit of money, to be paid out in satisfaction of any sum found to be due the landlords, as fixed in an order of the County Court. This was the equivalent of payment prior to the time that any warrant of dispossess could be issued upon the making of the order, and 'the efficacy of the stipulation looking towards payment was the same as that of section 1435 of the Civil Practice Act. (Matter ■ of Flewwellin v. Lent, 91 App. Div. 430 ; Levinsky v. Thompson, 125 Mise. 897; *667 Matter of Ehrlich v. Cassidy, 243 App. Div. 786 ; Hett v. Lange, 139 App. Div. 743 ; People ex rel. Eilgallon v. Nuhn, 92 Mise. 312, affd. 173 App. Div. 895 .) In any event, there was payment in full to the landlords on September 4, 1950, so that there was no occasion for-a provision in the resettled order and judgment, subsequently made, adjudging the landlords to be entitled to possession and to decree issuance of a warrant. Present — Nolan, P. J., Carswell, Johnston, Sneed and Wenzel, JJ.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 0 cases

No case in this database cites this case.

Authorities cited 3

DepthCaseCited by
Flewwellin v. Lent, 91 A.D. 430 (1904) 20
Hett v. Lange, 139 A.D. 743 (1910) 7
Ehrlich v. Cassidy, 243 A.D. 786 (1935) 3

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list