Ben Bimberg & Co. v. Unity Coat & Apron Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Ben Bimberg & Co. v. Unity Coat & Apron Co.

240 A.D. 959, 268 N.Y.S. 881

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided December 15, 1933·Published

Opinion

Order affirmed, with twenty dollars costs and disbursements. The complaint on its face does not show that the stock of merchandise which was the subject of the transfer was not intended for resale in the regular conduct of the business of the transferor. The admissions made by plaintiffs in the affidavits on the application for summary judgment under rule 113 of the Rules of Civil Practice, which were especially limited to the purposes of that motion, cannot be used by defendant here. Present — Finch, P. J., Merrell, Townley, Glennon and Untermyer, JJ.

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

Order affirmed, with twenty dollars costs and disbursements. The complaint on its face does not show that the stock of merchandise which was the subject of the transfer was not intended for resale in the regular conduct of the business of the transferor. The admissions made by plaintiffs in the affidavits on the application for summary judgment under rule 113 of the Rules of Civil Practice, which were especially limited to the purposes of that motion, cannot be used by defendant here. Present — Finch, P. J., Merrell, Townley, Glennon and Untermyer, JJ.

Ben Bimberg & Co. v. Unity Coat & Apron Co., 240 A.D. 959, 268 N.Y.S. 881 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1933).

Pincite

240 A.D. 959 (Ben Bimberg & Co. v. Unity Coat & Apron Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.