Beigel v. Finkelstein

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Beigel v. Finkelstein

275 A.D.2d 948

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

DecidedJune 13, 1949

StatusPublished

This text of 275 A.D.2d 948 (Beigel v. Finkelstein) 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

Beigel v. Finkelstein, 275 A.D.2d 948 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1949).

Pincite

Opinion

There was substantial proof before the commission to sustain its determination that an immediate compelling necessity had not been established. The commission’s denial of the application, under the circumstances, was an exercise of discretion, which the courts may not disturb. (Matter of Silverman v. Finkelstein, 275 App. Div. 790, and eases cited.) Nolan, P. J., Carswell, Johnston, Wenzel and MaeCrate, JJ., concur.

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

There was substantial proof before the commission to sustain its determination that an immediate compelling necessity had not been established. The commission’s denial of the application, under the circumstances, was an exercise of discretion, which the courts may not disturb. (Matter of Silverman v. Finkelstein, 275 App. Div. 790, and eases cited.) Nolan, P. J., Carswell, Johnston, Wenzel and MaeCrate, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

275 A.D.2d 948, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/beigel-v-finkelstein-nyappdiv-1949.