Audio Fidelity, Inc. v. Dukes of Dixieland

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Audio Fidelity, Inc. v. Dukes of Dixieland

20 A.D.2d 776, 247 N.Y.S.2d 833, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4202

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

DecidedMarch 19, 1964

StatusPublished

This text of 20 A.D.2d 776 (Audio Fidelity, Inc. v. Dukes of Dixieland) 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

Audio Fidelity, Inc. v. Dukes of Dixieland, 20 A.D.2d 776, 247 N.Y.S.2d 833, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4202 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1964).

Pincite

Opinion

— Order, entered on December 24, 1963, unanimously modified, on the law and on the facts and in the exercise of discretion, with $20 costs and disbursements to appellant, to delete the third and fourth decretal paragraphs providing for an early trial. The direction for an early trial, amounting to the granting of a preference, is not justified by the record and runs counter to the provisions of rules of the court providing for the “ consent of the parties ” as a condition precedent to the granting of an immediate trial where an application is made for a temporary injunction. (New York and Bronx Counties Supreme Ct. Rules, rule VIII, subd. 1, par. [e]; cf. Morton New York City Corp. v. Wolfson, 15 A D 2d 645.) Concur — Botein, P. J., Valente, McNally, Stevens and Eager, JJ.

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

— Order, entered on December 24, 1963, unanimously modified, on the law and on the facts and in the exercise of discretion, with $20 costs and disbursements to appellant, to delete the third and fourth decretal paragraphs providing for an early trial. The direction for an early trial, amounting to the granting of a preference, is not justified by the record and runs counter to the provisions of rules of the court providing for the “ consent of the parties ” as a condition precedent to the granting of an immediate trial where an application is made for a temporary injunction. (New York and Bronx Counties Supreme Ct. Rules, rule VIII, subd. 1, par. [e]; cf. Morton New York City Corp. v. Wolfson, 15 A D 2d 645.) Concur — Botein, P. J., Valente, McNally, Stevens and Eager, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

20 A.D.2d 776, 247 N.Y.S.2d 833, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4202, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/audio-fidelity-inc-v-dukes-of-dixieland-nyappdiv-1964.