Back v. Wagemann

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Back v. Wagemann

273 A.D. 1002, 80 N.Y.S.2d 609, 1948 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5699

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

DecidedMay 24, 1948

StatusPublished

This text of 273 A.D. 1002 (Back v. Wagemann) 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

Back v. Wagemann, 273 A.D. 1002, 80 N.Y.S.2d 609, 1948 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5699 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1948).

Pincite

Opinion

Order appealed from unanimously affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements to the respondent. The denial of the motion to punish for contempt was proper. (See Matter of Gill v. Schwarts, 273 App. Div. 606; Bergman v. Buechler, 249 App. Div. 553; Compton & Co. v. Williams, 248 App.-Div. 545.) With respect to that part of the order directing a reference as to the matters involved on the cross motion we feel that the facts and circumstances under which the appellant procured an assignment of the judgment should be fully developed. We do not pass upon the merits and express no opinion as to the propriety of the relief sought on the cross motion. Present — Peek, P. J., Dore, Cohn, Callahan and Van Voorhis, JJ.

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

Order appealed from unanimously affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements to the respondent. The denial of the motion to punish for contempt was proper. (See Matter of Gill v. Schwarts, 273 App. Div. 606; Bergman v. Buechler, 249 App. Div. 553; Compton & Co. v. Williams, 248 App.-Div. 545.) With respect to that part of the order directing a reference as to the matters involved on the cross motion we feel that the facts and circumstances under which the appellant procured an assignment of the judgment should be fully developed. We do not pass upon the merits and express no opinion as to the propriety of the relief sought on the cross motion. Present — Peek, P. J., Dore, Cohn, Callahan and Van Voorhis, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

273 A.D. 1002, 80 N.Y.S.2d 609, 1948 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5699, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/back-v-wagemann-nyappdiv-1948.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack