Agress v. Turkmenilli
103 N.E.2d 900, 303 N.Y. 797, 1952 N.Y. LEXIS 1287
This text of 103 N.E.2d 900 (Agress v. Turkmenilli) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Bluebook
Agress v. Turkmenilli, 103 N.E.2d 900, 303 N.Y. 797, 1952 N.Y. LEXIS 1287 (N.Y. 1952).
Opinion
In each proceeding .* Order affirmed, with costs; no opinion.
Concur: Lewis, Conway, Desmond, Dye and Froessel, JJ. Loughran, Ch. J., and Fuld, J., dissent on the ground that plaintiffs waived their rights under the arbitration clause in prosecuting their action against the defendant as they did.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Inc. v. Griesenbeck
234 N.E.2d 456 (New York Court of Appeals, 1967)
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
103 N.E.2d 900, 303 N.Y. 797, 1952 N.Y. LEXIS 1287, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/agress-v-turkmenilli-ny-1952.