Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 1905

Muttart v. Muttart

Muttart v. Muttart
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · Decided April 24, 1905 · Leventritt
93 N.Y.S. 468 (New York Supplement)

Counsel

John Oscar Ball, for appellant., Goodale, Files & Reese, for respondent.

Muttart v. Muttart

Opinion of the Court

LEVENTRITT, J.

The appeal, having been taken only from the order sustaining the demurrer, cannot be entertained. Stoddard v. Bell, 100 App. Div. 389, 91 N. Y. Supp. 477. If we could consider it, we should have to hold that the complaint is insufficient. It is defective to sustain in any court an action, as on a New Jersey judgment. Beyond this, however, taking notice, for the pur*469pose of this opinion, that the Court of Chancery of New Jersey is a court of record, it is clear that, under subdivision 6 of section 1 of the Municipal Court act (Laws 1902, p. 1488, c. 580), the court below had no jurisdiction.

Appeal dismissed, with $10 costs. All concur.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.