Blumenstock v. Weissman
50 Misc. 2d 119, 269 N.Y.S.2d 507, 1966 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2033
Opinion
In our opinion the holding of the County Court that it lacked jurisdiction to entertain the motion to vacate its prior determination would be equally applicable to the Justice’s Court had an application for similar relief been directed to that court in the first instance. (See Duran v. Chelsea Exch. Bank, 123 Misc. 158.)
The order should be affirmed, with $10 costs.
Margett, Brenner and Ollifpe, JJ., concur.
Order affirmed, etc.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Blumenstock v. Weissman, 50 Misc. 2d 119, 269 N.Y.S.2d 507, 1966 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2033 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1966).
50 Misc. 2d 119 (Blumenstock v. Weissman) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Aurnou v. Greenspan
182 A.D.2d 523 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1992)
Department of Housing Preservation & Development v. Park Properties Development Associates
154 Misc. 2d 315 (Civil Court of the City of New York, 1992)
Merrill v. Robinson
106 A.D.2d 818 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1984)