Abelow v. Diamond

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Abelow v. Diamond

54 A.D.2d 656, 388 N.Y.S.2d 10, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14181

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedOctober 26, 1976

StatusPublished

This text of 54 A.D.2d 656 (Abelow v. Diamond) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Abelow v. Diamond, 54 A.D.2d 656, 388 N.Y.S.2d 10, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14181 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County, entered May 4, 1976, unanimously affirmed, with $40 costs and disbursements to respondents. Pursuant to section 619 of the Business Corporation Law, an election of corporate officers has been challenged. There are issues of fact as to the relationship of the parties and their status or lack thereof as corporate directors or officers. These issues must be resolved before the issues of law tendered may be considered. The statute empowers the Special Term to take several courses in respect of such an application, one being to "hear the proofs and allegations of the parties” and another, alternatively, to "take such other action as justice may require.” Special Term has ordered a hearing to ascertain the facts. This is appropriate in the circumstances. Concur&emdash;Stevens, P. J., Markewich, Kupferman, Capozzoli and Lane, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Order, Supreme Court, New York County, entered May 4, 1976, unanimously affirmed, with $40 costs and disbursements to respondents. Pursuant to section 619 of the Business Corporation Law, an election of corporate officers has been challenged. There are issues of fact as to the relationship of the parties and their status or lack thereof as corporate directors or officers. These issues must be resolved before the issues of law tendered may be considered. The statute empowers the Special Term to take several courses in respect of such an application, one being to "hear the proofs and allegations of the parties” and another, alternatively, to "take such other action as justice may require.” Special Term has ordered a hearing to ascertain the facts. This is appropriate in the circumstances. Concur&emdash;Stevens, P. J., Markewich, Kupferman, Capozzoli and Lane, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

54 A.D.2d 656, 388 N.Y.S.2d 10, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14181, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/abelow-v-diamond-nyappdiv-1976.