Alexander Strull Advertising, Inc. v. Acrolite Products, Inc.
This text of 27 A.D.2d 847 (Alexander Strull Advertising, Inc. v. Acrolite Products, Inc.) 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.
Opinion
Motion by respondent for reargument granted and, upon reargument, the decision and order of this court, both dated December 27, 1966 [27 A- D 2d 574], are amended by providing that costs and disbursements shall abide the event, instead of awarding $10 costs and disbursements to appellant; determination in said decision and order otherwise adhered to. Beldock, P. J., ITghetta, Christ, Brennan and Hopkins, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
27 A.D.2d 847, 1967 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4665, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/alexander-strull-advertising-inc-v-acrolite-products-inc-nyappdiv-1967.