
    (21 App. Div. 475, 476.)
    WETTER v. ERICHS. CONTI v. BARILATI. MURPHY et al. v. CHRISTIAN PRESS ASS’N CO. PEOPLE v. COMMERCIAL ALLIANCE INS. CO. In re PRIESTLY. In re STAFFORD.
    (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.
    October 15, 1897.)
    Appeals—Failure to Serve in Time—Extension oe Time to Serve.
    Where the papers on appeal were not served within the time allowed by law, and no attempt was made to have the time extended or the default opened, the appeal must be dismissed.
    Motions to dismiss appeals. Appeals dismissed.
    Argued before VAN BRUNT, P..J., and BARRETT, RUMSEY, WILLIAMS, and PATTERSON, JJ.
    C. C. Nadal, Louis Steckler, Strong & Cadwalader, Hotchkiss & Maddox, and James P. Niemann, for the motions.
    August P. Wagner, Franklin Bien, John H. Fargis, J. Edward Ackley, and Thomas McAdam, opposed.
   PER CURIAM.

This court, as long ago as October, 1896, when the case of Gamble v. Lennon, 9 App. Div. 407, 41 N. Y. Supp. 277, was decided, declared that, where parties desired extensions for the purpose of serving their papers upon appeal, applications therefor must be made to the court below, and that such applications would not be entertained by the appellate division. The appellants in the above-entitled motions having made no attempt to get the time to serve their papers extended, or to have their defaults opened, their appeals must be dismissed, with $10 costs in each case.  