Blumenthal v. Meadow Brook National Bank

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Blumenthal v. Meadow Brook National Bank

11 A.D.2d 767, 205 N.Y.S.2d 963, 1960 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8679

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

DecidedJuly 5, 1960

StatusPublished

This text of 11 A.D.2d 767 (Blumenthal v. Meadow Brook National Bank) 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

Blumenthal v. Meadow Brook National Bank, 11 A.D.2d 767, 205 N.Y.S.2d 963, 1960 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8679 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1960).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to compel defendants to issue to plaintiff certain shares of stock allegedly purchased from Dorothy Tolins, the defendant bank interpleaded Dorothy Tolins and Stanley H. Whyte. The latter in his answer and counterclaim sought the same relief as did plaintiff with respect to the same shares of stock on the basis of a previous assignment from Dorothy Tolins. The interpleaded defendant Whyte appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, entered February 18, 1960, denying his motion, made more than three years after joinder of issue, to dismiss the complaint for failure to prosecute, pursuant to section 181 of the Civil Practice Act and rule 156 of the Rules of Civil Practice. Order affirmed, without costs. No opinion. Beldock, Acting P. J., Christ, Pette and Brennan, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to compel defendants to issue to plaintiff certain shares of stock allegedly purchased from Dorothy Tolins, the defendant bank interpleaded Dorothy Tolins and Stanley H. Whyte. The latter in his answer and counterclaim sought the same relief as did plaintiff with respect to the same shares of stock on the basis of a previous assignment from Dorothy Tolins. The interpleaded defendant Whyte appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, entered February 18, 1960, denying his motion, made more than three years after joinder of issue, to dismiss the complaint for failure to prosecute, pursuant to section 181 of the Civil Practice Act and rule 156 of the Rules of Civil Practice. Order affirmed, without costs. No opinion. Beldock, Acting P. J., Christ, Pette and Brennan, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

11 A.D.2d 767, 205 N.Y.S.2d 963, 1960 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8679, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/blumenthal-v-meadow-brook-national-bank-nyappdiv-1960.